4 ms·

If the hypothesis this article is aiming to strike down is that there is currently a clear path to solving AGI, then it's simply fighting a potential misconcept

If the hypothesis this article is aiming to strike down is that there is currently a clear path to solving AGI, then it's simply fighting a potential misconception of the masses. The reality is that recent advances in AI, while not providing the full picture, are quite strong. Object recognition ten years ago, even at the level of 2011's Imagenet results, seemed impossible. The downsides to deep learning mentioned in the article, are both clear side effects of the formulation, and simultaneously being addressed by the community in various ways. For what it's worth, I'm with LeCun and Hinton on this one. The abstract human reasoning required for even high level perceptual tasks is difficult for humans to consciously dissect, but it could easily be that it's actually relatively mundane when subjected to appropriate representations.

bobthechef 9y ago
> The abstract human reasoning required for even high level perceptual tasks is difficult for humans to consciously dissect, but it could easily be that it's actually relatively mundane I don't think so. Philosophers have theorized about abstract thought for thousands of years. The materialist metaphysics that is uncritically and unconsciously held by the triumphalist philistines isn't even capable IN PRINCIPLE of accounting for it. In any case, AI is useful, and will continue to be, but the fanfare is just noise distracting from the truth of what it is.
- vladislav 9y ago
  relatively mundane when subjected to appropriate representations. You omitted the important part of my statement. And the difficulty humans encounter in reasoning about the nature of abstract thought itself is something I also pointed out. My point is that this is not necessarily an indication of inherent difficulty. The ability to model and explain the nature of a self-reflecting mechanism is not a guaranteed natural ability of that mechanism itself.

bobthechef 9y ago

> The abstract human reasoning required for even high level perceptual tasks is difficult for humans to consciously dissect, but it could easily be that it's actually relatively mundane I don't think so. Philosophers have theorized about abstract thought for thousands of years. The materialist metaphysics that is uncritically and unconsciously held by the triumphalist philistines isn't even capable IN PRINCIPLE of accounting for it. In any case, AI is useful, and will continue to be, but the fanfare is just noise distracting from the truth of what it is.

vladislav 9y ago
relatively mundane when subjected to appropriate representations. You omitted the important part of my statement. And the difficulty humans encounter in reasoning about the nature of abstract thought itself is something I also pointed out. My point is that this is not necessarily an indication of inherent difficulty. The ability to model and explain the nature of a self-reflecting mechanism is not a guaranteed natural ability of that mechanism itself.