Steve Wozniak says he's "disappointed a lot" by AI and rarely uses it

midian182

Posts: 11,726   +177
Staff member
In brief: While it's fair to say that most people are skeptical at best when it comes to AI and its abilities, the opposite is often true for those in tech. But Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak is one of the exceptions. In a recent interview, Woz said he doesn't use AI very much, and when he does, he's "disappointed a lot."

In a CNN interview in which he was asked about Apple's upcoming 50th anniversary and how the company has shaped the tech industry, Wozniak was asked what excites and scares him about AI.

It appears that Wozniak isn't as enthusiastic about AI as the interviewer expected, and a lot of his complaints are relatable.

"I'll ask a question where one word is the key item, the direction I want to go, and AI will come back with a whole bunch of clear explanations that are on the subject, but not what I really was interested in," he said, something most people will be familiar with.

Wozniak said it might be "hard to explain" his grievances, but added that AI's generated text is "too dry and too perfect, and I want something from a human being, and I'm disappointed a lot."

Appearing to ignore Wozniak's lack of love for AI, the interviewer followed up with a question about whether AI could improve and replace humans in some respects.

Wozniak admitted that everything gets better, but he's seen no signs yet that "we understand well enough how the brain works to get to that point that it replaces the human; has emotions; cares about things; wants to help others; wants to be a good person."

He admitted, though, that it's impossible to say something can never happen when it comes to technology, and that someday AI could be even smarter and "understand you the way another human would."

Woz's cautious view is a contrast to many tech luminaries' hyperbolic statements about AI. Google boss Sundar Pichai said it will be bigger than the internet, something Apple's Tim Cook and investor Ben Horowitz also believe.

Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said the launch of ChatGPT was like going from the bicycle to the steam engine. Bill Gates said the development of AI is as fundamental as the creation of the microprocessor, the personal computer, the internet, and the mobile phone. But possibly the grandest claim came from VC Marc Andreessen, who said "AI will save the world."

There are also those who slam people for having negative opinions of AI. Mustafa Suleyman, CEO of Microsoft's AI group, called public criticism of the tech "mind-blowing," Nvidia's Jensen Huang says the negativity is hurting society, and Nadella has pleaded to move the conversation beyond "AI slop."

Image credit: Gage Skidmore

Permalink to story:

 
Rightfully so, people are disappointed by today's artificial neural networks. Tech companies are to blame for getting society's hopes up before strong AI has been reached.

Sociological concerns aside, as long as the brain works by rules instead of magic, its principles can be replicated, no doubt even sentience. Nature showed that it's done using biological computing. It may take 50 or 500 years. There's quite a jump going from the ENIAC to the Samsung Galaxy.
 
The Woz is a legend for sure, but in an industry like tech, expertise ages like vinegar not wine.

That said from an end user perspective Gen AI has certainly been helpful for brainstorming, getting together basic documents (job descriptions, interview questions, etc) but hasn't really seemed much more useful than that given the trillions that have gone into it.

The DevOps guys at work are pretty goo goo about it from a prototyping perspective and keep promising they'll be able to to work more project submissions with the time savings, but I haven't seen it yet.
 
I don't think he understands LLMs all that well. You give it some words and then it generates the statistically relevant words that should go next. In that sense, AI will never be human-like.

When somebody is talking with me the first thing I ask myself is: What is he about and what's this person hiding from me? So rarely my output has to do anything with what people actually say.
 
Wozniak doesn't answer to shareholders. Cook does.

None of these CEOs of publicly-traded companies actually believe in the value of the bullsh*t they're peddling, but since they are now heavily invested in AI directly or by proxy to other companies who are, being AI evangelists is now just...part of the job description. It would be career suicide, for any of these highly-paid tech bros, to come out and admit that they've been fleeced by idiocy, in their moronic crusade to replace the human race with data centers.
 
Woz isn’t wrong about AI’s current limitations, but its power is in being a force multiplier for someone who already possesses deep expertise.

Between two evenly matched specialists in a high-stakes, data-intensive field, where one uses AI to synthesize multi-polar data, validate accuracy, and explore conclusions beyond unaided human capability, the one using AI will come on top. Every time.
 
Ron Gilbert, too.

https://grumpygamer.com/my_dinner_with_ai/

In a short story I wrote a few years ago, we're a few centuries in the future and humanity is experiencing its first sub-luminal journey towards a foreign star system. The ship has an extremely powerful AI that can take critical decisions about the crew. And it's still a fu***** machine-based AI with no trace of "intelligence" in it, and does not go mad. The human does :-D
 
AI is a tool. Those able to wield the tool will be more productive. Is it perfect? NO. Is it super intelligent? NO. But it is extremely useful. AI has helped me diagnose multiple complex Windows issues I was having. AI has helped me complete a project using Davinci Resolve with some issues I was having. It is like having a "super manual" in your pocket or your own personal expert that you can bounce ideas off of. It saved me a LOT of frustration and having to call friends for "advice" or ideas of what could be happening.
 
AI is a tool. Those able to wield the tool will be more productive. Is it perfect? NO. Is it super intelligent? NO. But it is extremely useful. AI has helped me diagnose multiple complex Windows issues I was having. AI has helped me complete a project using Davinci Resolve with some issues I was having. It is like having a "super manual" in your pocket or your own personal expert that you can bounce ideas off of. It saved me a LOT of frustration and having to call friends for "advice" or ideas of what could be happening.

It's just so damn accurate, that by uploading a simple vid of your car's engine behaving weird able to diagnose it within a second. I mean AI will have a solid ground now and in the future. And yes it will cost lots of jobs if not already, knowing how Meta, amazon and all the others are pushing for massive layoffs to gain net profit.

Meta was a funny one too; hiring Ai geeks to build a moderation system; test-run it and fire everyone at it once it was live. It's *****ic because even if you report an obvious scam ad these days AI believes it's within the community's guidelines.

https://www.techspot.com/news/110195-meta-profiting-scam-ads-despite-promises-crack-down.html

Retards. All of them.
 
He isn't trying to profit from the AI hype-train and so is speaking the truth just like 99.9% of people. He's not claiming that AGI has been achieved like Jensen because he isn't trying to prop up flagging support for a technological dead-end.
 
Back