Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

40% of 'AI Startups' in Europe Don't Actually Use AI, Claims Report (forbes.com)

Posted by msmash on from the how-about-that dept.

Two-fifths of Europe's AI startups do not use any AI programs in their products, according to a report that highlights the hype around the technology. From a report: Out of 2,830 startups in Europe who were classified as being AI companies, only 1,580 accurately fit that description according to the eye-opening stat on page 99 of a new report from MMC, a London-based venture capital firm. The label, which refers to computer systems that can perform tasks normally requiring human intelligence, was simply wrong.

"We looked at every company, their materials, their product, the website, and product documents," says David Kelnar, head of research for MMC which has $400 million under management and a portfolio of 34 companies. "In 40% of cases we could find no mention of evidence of AI." In such cases, he added, "companies that people assume and think are AI companies are probably not."

5 of 112 comments (clear)

  1. Coincidentally by Luthair · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No one does, at best people are using machine learning.

    1. Re:Coincidentally by sfcat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Reminds me of a screenshot I saw some days ago: "If it's written in Python, it's probably machine learning. If it's written in Powerpoint, it's probably AI"

      That quote is wrong...it should be, if its in Python, its applied math but is being called machine learning, if its in LISP or Prolog then its probably AI. Actually, no self-respecting CS person uses Python. Python is used by academics from other fields like Physics who then use their field's variant of mathematical analysis and call it AI. Then they turn down a person with an actual CS degree and experience in ML for a data science job because they don't understand some weird jargon that was invented two weeks ago. This is no surprise to me...the entire "Big Data" thing has been a fraud since the beginning and since the bosses have no idea what AI is, they can't tell when they are being conned. And apparently neither can the investors.

      --
      "Those that start by burning books, will end by burning men."
    2. Re:Coincidentally by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Insightful

      AI used to mean "machines that think like a human" (or at least close enough to be in Searle's Chinese room). After a while, AI turned out to be harder than everyone thought, so some people redefined AI to mean, "stuff we found while looking for AI." The original meaning of AI got renamed to "strong AI." That's in academia.

      In the outside world, the press and the media and popular culture, AI retains its original meaning: "machines that think like a human." Which is confusing for a lot of people when they hear scientists talking about AI, because strong AI has not been invented, and we have no idea even how to do it. We're missing some fairly important pieces.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  2. No kidding by Brett+Buck · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Claiming that you are an "AI" company is just marketing buzz for most. Last year they would have been "blockchain startups", in 1999 they would have been "internet companies", and in 1960 they would have been somehow worked the word "rocket" into the name. It's been this way forever.

  3. Re:A case of cultural difference more likely by prefec2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The article is about analysts which claim other analysts made a wrong assessment based on data both do not have.

    So it is all bullshit. BTW they do not define what they mean by AI.