7 ms·
> The real issue of course is what don't how intelligence actually works so it's impossible to set a fixed goalpost of when AI is truly achieved. No, the real
by maaku 11y ago
> The real issue of course is what don't how intelligence actually works so it's impossible to set a fixed goalpost of when AI is truly achieved.
No, the real issue is that people still think, intuitively, that there's a little homunculus in their head making the decisions. Each time we build something that doesn't look like a homunculus, we've failed at attaining "real" intelligence...
- mojuba 11y agoMaking decisions is not that complicated, neither is it interesting. Your iPhone can make a decision to kill a process that takes too much system resources while in the background. What's more interesting (and what seems to be the main function of the so called homunculus) is being aware of your own location in space and time, as well as remembering previous locations. In other words, having some model of the world and knowing your place in it is what computers haven't achieved yet in any meaningful way.
- dllthomas 11y agoSo, map building is now what will truly define AI until it's also just another technology.
- dkarapetyan 11y agoHow is map building AI? It's a pretty mechanical process. Start somewhere, make some measurements, move along, repeat. At what point is there any notion of intelligence involved?
- dllthomas 11y agoIt's deeper than you describe... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simultaneous_localization_and_mapping https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simultaneous_localization_and_... ... but I agree that there's nothing in particular that distinguishes it from other problems. My comment was satirical in nature. SLAM is an interpretation of what the parent comment had described: "[B]eing aware of your own location in space and time, as well as remembering previous locations. In other words, having some model of the world and knowing your place in it[.]". There is a general pattern of statements of the form "We'll only really have AI when computers X", followed by computers being able to X, followed by everyone concluding that X is just a simple matter of engineering like everything else we've already accomplished. As my AI prof put it, ages ago, "AI is the study of things that don't work yet."
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- cwyers 11y agoOr it could be, a system capable of reasoning its way to doing X would be intelligent, but you can also teach to the test, so to speak, and build a system that does X without being generalizable and thus satisfy X without being intelligent.
- dllthomas 11y agoThat's sort of where a lot of people have arrived, to be sure, with distinguishing the notion of an "artificial general intelligence" from other things in the AI bucket.
- gnaritas 11y ago> Or it could be, a system capable of reasoning its way to doing X would be intelligent, but you can also teach to the test, so to speak, and build a system that does X without being generalizable and thus satisfy X without being intelligent. Which is exactly what we do with many kids today; makes you wonder how many times we might invent AI and not know it because we don't raise it correctly so it appears too dumb to be considered a success.
- eli_gottlieb 11y agoControl theory is a thing. Causal induction is a thing.
- dkarapetyan 11y agoControl theory: worked with some smart folks when it came to designing plant control systems. All of it was human labor. There was zero intelligence on the part of the tools and all parameters had to be figured out by the person designing the control stategy. Causal induction: sounds interesting until you dig in and realize everything is non-computable. So what exactly is your point?
- eli_gottlieb 11y ago>Causal induction: sounds interesting until you dig in and realize everything is non-computable. Wait, what?
- dkarapetyan 11y agoHere you go: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomonoff%27s_theory_of_inductive_inference https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomonoff%27s_theory_of_induc.... Follow the chain a little bit and you'll come to things like: http://www.hutter1.net/publ/aixiaxiom2.pdf http://www.hutter1.net/publ/aixiaxiom2.pdf. Super interesting but very impractical.
- eli_gottlieb 11y agoCausal induction is a different thing from Solomonoff Induction. https://cocosci.berkeley.edu/tom/papers/tbci.pdf https://cocosci.berkeley.edu/tom/papers/tbci.pdf
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- lgas 11y agoYour iPhone is aware of it's own location in space and time and remembers previous locations as well.
- mojuba 11y agoI don't think the iPhone has a model of the world with its own body in it. You could program that too, and once you also add the ability to move/act according to a certain goal, you have an intelligent agent. However, making your system more or less useful is what takes the task of AI to levels of complexity we can't reach yet. Compare ants and dogs: the former is achievable in terms of simulation but not interesting, the latter can be potentially useful but is already too complex for us to implement.
- tim333 11y ago> impossible to set a fixed goalpost of when AI is truly achieved We have a kind of fixed goal post in human intelligence. When computers are worse at something than humans like chess it's thought of as intelligence and when they get better it's ticked off as just an algorithm. The AI researches gradually tick off abilities. Chess long ago, image recognition happening now, general reasoning at some point in the future.
- gnaritas 11y agoThat's basically what I'm saying in the previous sentence.