>Someone making a bet on that basis on AI back in 1960 would have lost badly. Everything always seems like it's 3 to 5 years away. Of course, someone who says

>Someone making a bet on that basis on AI back in 1960 would have lost badly. Everything always seems like it's 3 to 5 years away. Of course, someone who says that 3-5 years before it really happens wouldn't be wrong. It's worth keeping in mind that those old AI failures succeeded in doing much of what deep learning hasn't done, and failed to do much of what deep learning has now done. I think, regardless of whether or not they add up to 'true general AI', we have the basic ideas necessary to produce systems that are much more generally intelligent than anything we've seen before, in the near future.