3 ms·

The article brings up some good points, but I believe we're just in an interim phase with AI right now. Eventually, AI will be able to self-learn in areas outs

The article brings up some good points, but I believe we're just in an interim phase with AI right now. Eventually, AI will be able to self-learn in areas outside of games and environments where certain factors are hidden. My guess is that in 5 to 10 years, we will be blown away with some AI abilities.

jacquesm 9y ago
> My guess is that in 5 to 10 years, we will be blown away with some AI abilities. I'm already blown away. The last decade has seen stuff come to fruit with actual applications that I did not expect to see in my lifetime. At the same time, plenty of stuff that we consider trivial for humans is still well outside the realm of the possible, so there is plenty of room for growth but even though there is talk of a new plateau in AI technology and applications of that technology I don't see it yet from where I'm standing.
- dmreedy 9y ago
  Unfortunately, room for growth does not guarantee ability for growth. The revolutions we see now have sprung largely from a handful of work that came to fruition ten or so years ago: a new set of tools to approximate solutions to previously intractable problems. It took thirty years for those tools to be developed, with the fortunate confluence of the development of many other technologies alongside, and it does seem like they're already reaching the limit of new things they can "solve". So while there is probably still headroom in application and capitalization, success in 'solving' any given problem in AI does not have any clear correlation to any other problem in the set of things still trivial to humans but inaccessible to artificial machines. There's no convenient hierarchy of complexity like we have for more general computation, no proof by equivalence or operational measurement of difficulty. This space is still a huge mystery, and at any given moment, we have no idea if the path we're on is going to lead anywhere other than a dead end; research of this nature is not monotonic. This pattern is not infrequent in AI.
0xdeadbeefbabe 9y ago
Like with a ballistic missile submarine? Edit: Kalman Filter (ahem)

jacquesm 9y ago

> My guess is that in 5 to 10 years, we will be blown away with some AI abilities. I'm already blown away. The last decade has seen stuff come to fruit with actual applications that I did not expect to see in my lifetime. At the same time, plenty of stuff that we consider trivial for humans is still well outside the realm of the possible, so there is plenty of room for growth but even though there is talk of a new plateau in AI technology and applications of that technology I don't see it yet from where I'm standing.

dmreedy 9y ago
Unfortunately, room for growth does not guarantee ability for growth. The revolutions we see now have sprung largely from a handful of work that came to fruition ten or so years ago: a new set of tools to approximate solutions to previously intractable problems. It took thirty years for those tools to be developed, with the fortunate confluence of the development of many other technologies alongside, and it does seem like they're already reaching the limit of new things they can "solve". So while there is probably still headroom in application and capitalization, success in 'solving' any given problem in AI does not have any clear correlation to any other problem in the set of things still trivial to humans but inaccessible to artificial machines. There's no convenient hierarchy of complexity like we have for more general computation, no proof by equivalence or operational measurement of difficulty. This space is still a huge mystery, and at any given moment, we have no idea if the path we're on is going to lead anywhere other than a dead end; research of this nature is not monotonic. This pattern is not infrequent in AI.

0xdeadbeefbabe 9y ago

Like with a ballistic missile submarine? Edit: Kalman Filter (ahem)