4 ms·

I did consider that point and agree to an extent. However, it seems to be written by someone that does not have enough knowledge or experience in the field. Som

I did consider that point and agree to an extent. However, it seems to be written by someone that does not have enough knowledge or experience in the field. Someone who is merely repeating what could be considered a popular opinion. Which, actually, is my biggest issue with the post. Its unoriginal and brings nothing to the table. Typical venturebeat content. Words written with the only goal of generating traffic. Blogspam aimed at a smarter audience (you). It could have been so much better. Why not explore how AI could have prevented his medicine being served incorrectly? Why not investigate how a smart agent could use current state CV to make decisions and serve medications? It would have been valuable even if technically wrong. Its useful to understand how AI is understood by outsiders. But no, the author simply talks about the promise of AI. Which is fine, but brings nothing to the table. We've been talking about that promise for decades. Will AI end up obviating most work? I don't know. But Id love to talk about that with people who are informed.

AndrewKemendo 10y ago
I'll talk to you about it! In fact though, what you ask for is really, really hard to do, and I'm sure this author had a deadline and a senior editor to work with. The reality of the situation is that this is a devastatingly complex topic. As in, the dependencies are overwhelming if you haven't been studying it for decades. For example to even scratch the surface you have to have a quality understanding of history, understand broad technology trends since before antiquity, understand macroeconomics, have specific technical knowledge (like how does a neural net work), recognize the importance of cognitive science and biology, and all of this goes into this stew of trying to understand the AGI landscape. You can't boil that down into a feature length article.
- pryelluw 10y ago
  Yes, absolutely. Id love to know what the author would have come up with. It helps understand how people perceive AI. It has become hard to see what the general perception is after working on it. He does shed some light but stops to change the subject. And yes, it is hard to do. I once wrote what I thought was going to be a well received article on AI. I used Jobs analogy of "the bicycle of the mind" to make a point about how AI could end up turning the bicycle into a more powerful method of transport (I used a motorcycle). Thus supercharging our abilities even more. But decided not to publish it until things become more clear. I dont want to sell something that might turn out to be quite different to what most expect. Because who knows when/if the singilarity happens and how how it will impact us.

AndrewKemendo 10y ago

I'll talk to you about it! In fact though, what you ask for is really, really hard to do, and I'm sure this author had a deadline and a senior editor to work with. The reality of the situation is that this is a devastatingly complex topic. As in, the dependencies are overwhelming if you haven't been studying it for decades. For example to even scratch the surface you have to have a quality understanding of history, understand broad technology trends since before antiquity, understand macroeconomics, have specific technical knowledge (like how does a neural net work), recognize the importance of cognitive science and biology, and all of this goes into this stew of trying to understand the AGI landscape. You can't boil that down into a feature length article.

pryelluw 10y ago
Yes, absolutely. Id love to know what the author would have come up with. It helps understand how people perceive AI. It has become hard to see what the general perception is after working on it. He does shed some light but stops to change the subject. And yes, it is hard to do. I once wrote what I thought was going to be a well received article on AI. I used Jobs analogy of "the bicycle of the mind" to make a point about how AI could end up turning the bicycle into a more powerful method of transport (I used a motorcycle). Thus supercharging our abilities even more. But decided not to publish it until things become more clear. I dont want to sell something that might turn out to be quite different to what most expect. Because who knows when/if the singilarity happens and how how it will impact us.