5 ms·
> But don't fool yourself. Humans and well..life..are just input output machines with incredible pattern matching capabilities. See, that seems to me like a st
by nkoren 9y ago
> But don't fool yourself. Humans and well..life..are just input output machines with incredible pattern matching capabilities.
See, that seems to me like a statement of faith which I just don't share. I think that building relational models of the world via abstract inductive reasoning is qualitatively different than pattern matching. I don't think there's some magic tonnage of pattern matching at which abstract inductive reasoning will suddenly emerge. I don't think that they're isomorphic. I think the AI toolkit still has a few missing pieces.
- goldenkey 9y agoThe only way to induce a consequence in a scenario is to have pattern matched the scenario. Pattern matching can be very abstract. It can use programs that may not halt. You are conflating patterns with exact details. A pattern can be as general as "[wildcard]." The human psyche promotes survival over *, every scenario. You talk about representations and reasoning but are not assessing the fact that the human brain is literally a decision maker, acting on stored procedures and memory. Any representations and any reasoning will only apply to a select scenario or select objects, regardless to how you wish to define the pattern, the fact that a subset of abstractness/generality out of the whole of existence is specified, implies a pattern that is coded for implicitly or explicitly.
- folksinger 9y agoYou claim to have the facts on the human brain? My God, the level of hubris expressed by members of the cult of AI has reached a fever-pitch. Stored procedures and memory? Newton, in the age of clocks, managed to present the universe in the image of a clock. Is it any wonder that computer programmers present the universe in the image of the computer?