Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

Computer vision engineers are still duct-taping tools together just to get a model into production. We just finished another round of user interviews and that frustration came up again and again. So we re-designed Studio to work around our new Pipelines + Workflow Canvas features. Visually design any vision...

10,794 просмотров • 7 дней назад •via X (Twitter)

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

Vision is an absolute marvel of Divine Engineering. It requires a minimum of 3 systems working together from the start, or we don't see. 1. Eyes to capture light & convert into signals 2. Pathways to transport the signal 3. A brain to process it Evolution can't build it one step at a time, because there is no vision until all those systems exist and function together. Compounding the complexity further, each of those 3 systems themselves require a minimum number of more complex subsystems to function properly. For instance, all eyes require opsin proteins. Opsin is a highly complex protein that holds a special light-sensitive molecule called retinal; when a single photon hits the retinal, it instantly flips shape, triggering the opsin to change its 3D shape and trigger a precise cascade which converts the light into an electrical signal to be sent to the brain where it can be understood as vision. Opsin alone, is useless. It needs the retinal molecule plus the full cascade, or it does nothing. This is the case with ALL vision systems, confirmed over and over again the lab. No partially formed system produces any vision, or any other function for that matter. Many uninformed Evolutionists attempt to argue that we see different levels of complexity in vision systems, which they say is evidence that vision evolved gradually from simpler systems. But the evolutionary scientists themselves refute this. Even the very simplest possible system of vision - the infamous "light sensitive cell" - still relies on a similar highly complex, interconnected network of proteins and other molecules. Mainstream evolutionary science even teaches that vision systems evolved independently, from scratch, at least 40 different times. The reason is because many vision systems are so different, operating with such unique parts, that one simply could not have evolved from another. The fossil record itself refutes the concept of step by step construction of vision systems. Complex eyes appear early in the fossil record, fully formed & functional. There is no increasing complexity in the fossil record - it's a complete contradiction of evolutionary predictions. The vision system has all the Hallmark evidence of design. A complex, interconnected web of information processing systems with incomprehensibly precise timing & coordination between them all to produce a highly specialized function. Nature does not, and cannot, produce such a system, not with all the time and resources in the entire universe. Everything you see is a testament to the Power of our Creator.

Divinely Designed

20,387 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Terence Tao has an IQ above 200. Youngest gold medalist in Math Olympiad history. Fields Medal winner. The greatest living mathematician by nearly any measure. And he just said something most people aren’t ready for. Tao: “This whole era of AI is teaching us that our idea of what intelligence is, is not really accurate.” We spent centuries building civilization on one assumption. That intelligence was sacred. Irreducible. Uniquely ours. The one thing that made the entire human story make sense. Then AI started solving things we swore only we could. Chess. Language. Vision. Math. And every time, we reached for the same defense. That’s not real intelligence. It’s just tricks. Just pattern matching. Just an algorithm. Tao: “You look at how it’s done and it doesn’t feel like intelligence.” So we moved the line. Again. And again. And again. Because intelligence was supposed to feel like something. Something deep. Something we could point to and say… this is what separates us from everything else. But AI kept solving the problems. And that feeling never arrived. Tao: “We were looking for some elusive, intelligent way of thinking and we don’t see it in the tools that actually solve our goals.” Here’s what makes it worse. Large language models work by predicting the next word. One word at a time. No grand architecture. No deep understanding. Just probability. And it works. Tao: “Maybe that’s actually a lot of what humans do as well.” The greatest living mathematician just told you human thought might run on the same machinery. Not some transcendent spark. Pattern recognition. Prediction. One thought, one decision, one word at a time. We built religion around intelligence. Philosophy around it. An entire species identity around it. And a machine running probability just held up a mirror. We didn’t lose intelligence to AI. We just finally saw what it always was. What haunts us isn’t that machines learned to think. It’s that thinking was never what we needed it to be.

Dustin

564,613 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад