2 ms·
Nope, human intelligence is inherently different than anything machines can do: http://www.box.net/shared/u13u3agxqg http://www.box.net/shared/u13u3agxqg
by yters 17y ago
Nope, human intelligence is inherently different than anything machines can do:
http://www.box.net/shared/u13u3agxqg http://www.box.net/shared/u13u3agxqg
- joe_the_user 17y agoLove a quote from this 'study': "While the results have not been quantified with a statistical test, it is CLEAR ON OBSERVATION that there is a significant performance difference between the human and non human agents." Human-level AI is an extremely complex problem and I wouldn't claim know everything that might be involved in creating it. But by token, refuting any possibility of AI is an equally complex problem. Neither "Clear on observation" conclusions nor the other haphazard observations of this paper cut it for such an analysis.
- yters 17y agoEh, well I've carried out a goodness of fit test since then for stats geeks (p < 0.05), but it doesn't really add anything substantial. What is haphazard about the rest of it? If you can point out specifics it'd help me strengthen the work.