3 ms·

> Theorists have proved that some mathematical problems are actually so complicated that they will always be challenging or even impossible for computers to sol

by gwern 8y ago

> Theorists have proved that some mathematical problems are actually so complicated that they will always be challenging or even impossible for computers to solve. So at least for now, people who can push forward the boundary of computationally hard problems need never fear for lack of work. That applies equally well to humans. Consider the complexity class of Go. > Meanwhile, many of the tasks that seem most basic to us humans—like running over rough terrain or interpreting body language—are all but impossible for the machines of today and the foreseeable future. Wow no.

Izkata 8y ago
> > Meanwhile, many of the tasks that seem most basic to us humans—like running over rough terrain or interpreting body language—are all but impossible for the machines of today and the foreseeable future. > Wow no. ...wow indeed. No research at all. Often I just read the comments here and skip the article, but that made me go and look to be sure. For anyone somehow still unaware (BigDog creepiness factor was nearly viral back when I was in college around 2008), BigDog has been handling rough terrain for over a decade: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1czBcnX1Ww https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1czBcnX1Ww Here's BigDog getting abused to see what it can recover from (including being kicked in the side): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PaTWufUqqU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PaTWufUqqU Here's a running cheetah robot jumping over unexpected obstacles (2015): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_luhn7TLfWU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_luhn7TLfWU And here's a two-legged robot walking around outside (2017): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Is4JZqhAy-M https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Is4JZqhAy-M
- throwaway080383 8y ago
  The latest video I saw was a two-legged robot doing a backflip.
- PeterisP 8y ago
  And for the "interpreting body language" part I recall seeing demos of transcribing sign language, and also of measuring speaker stress levels from video from all kinds of body factors. If it had some widespread commercial application there's no reason why we wouldn't have machines that read body language better than many humans.
- Animats 8y ago
  My "running on rough terrain" video from 1995.[1] On non-flat surfaces, traction control dominates the problem.[2][3] This was before Boston Dynamics. (There's much more that could be done in this area, but there's no market. BD still doesn't do speed changes fast. Their machines start by walking, running or trotting in place and then extend the gait. Humans start by falling forward, for a faster start, and go far off vertical for fast direction changes.) As for interpreting body language, here's the code on Github.[4] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kc5n0iTw-NU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kc5n0iTw-NU [2] http://animats.com/papers/leggedrun/leggedrun.html http://animats.com/papers/leggedrun/leggedrun.html [3] http://animats.com/papers/articulated/articulated.html http://animats.com/papers/articulated/articulated.html [4] https://github.com/shahqaan/kinect-body-language-analysis https://github.com/shahqaan/kinect-body-language-analysis
- sharemywin 8y ago
  Don't forget Handle. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7xvqQeoA8c&t=34s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7xvqQeoA8c&t=34s
jph00 8y ago
For some reason the field of AI has become an area where famous men who have no expertise in the field feel they have an obligation to tell us all about their opinions on it. Equally oddly, prestigious outlets then decide that these opinions deserve to be published so we can all read them. What the actual opinions are is not important - since they're not based on any actual understanding of the capabilities or limitations of the technology, even if sometimes some of them are accidentally correct, that doesn't make them interesting. (I guess as long as Nathan Myhrvold is pontificating on AI at least he's not spending that time on patent trolling, so there's some upside.)
gwern 8y ago
> That applies equally well to humans. Consider the complexity class of Go. Incidentally, my arguments against this general class of attempts to neuter AI via computational complexity arguments: https://www.gwern.net/Complexity-vs-AI https://www.gwern.net/Complexity-vs-AI

by gwern 8y ago

Izkata 8y ago

> > Meanwhile, many of the tasks that seem most basic to us humans—like running over rough terrain or interpreting body language—are all but impossible for the machines of today and the foreseeable future. > Wow no. ...wow indeed. No research at all. Often I just read the comments here and skip the article, but that made me go and look to be sure. For anyone somehow still unaware (BigDog creepiness factor was nearly viral back when I was in college around 2008), BigDog has been handling rough terrain for over a decade: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1czBcnX1Ww https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1czBcnX1Ww Here's BigDog getting abused to see what it can recover from (including being kicked in the side): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PaTWufUqqU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PaTWufUqqU Here's a running cheetah robot jumping over unexpected obstacles (2015): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_luhn7TLfWU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_luhn7TLfWU And here's a two-legged robot walking around outside (2017): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Is4JZqhAy-M https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Is4JZqhAy-M

throwaway080383 8y ago
The latest video I saw was a two-legged robot doing a backflip.
PeterisP 8y ago
And for the "interpreting body language" part I recall seeing demos of transcribing sign language, and also of measuring speaker stress levels from video from all kinds of body factors. If it had some widespread commercial application there's no reason why we wouldn't have machines that read body language better than many humans.
Animats 8y ago
My "running on rough terrain" video from 1995.[1] On non-flat surfaces, traction control dominates the problem.[2][3] This was before Boston Dynamics. (There's much more that could be done in this area, but there's no market. BD still doesn't do speed changes fast. Their machines start by walking, running or trotting in place and then extend the gait. Humans start by falling forward, for a faster start, and go far off vertical for fast direction changes.) As for interpreting body language, here's the code on Github.[4] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kc5n0iTw-NU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kc5n0iTw-NU [2] http://animats.com/papers/leggedrun/leggedrun.html http://animats.com/papers/leggedrun/leggedrun.html [3] http://animats.com/papers/articulated/articulated.html http://animats.com/papers/articulated/articulated.html [4] https://github.com/shahqaan/kinect-body-language-analysis https://github.com/shahqaan/kinect-body-language-analysis
sharemywin 8y ago
Don't forget Handle. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7xvqQeoA8c&t=34s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7xvqQeoA8c&t=34s

jph00 8y ago

For some reason the field of AI has become an area where famous men who have no expertise in the field feel they have an obligation to tell us all about their opinions on it. Equally oddly, prestigious outlets then decide that these opinions deserve to be published so we can all read them. What the actual opinions are is not important - since they're not based on any actual understanding of the capabilities or limitations of the technology, even if sometimes some of them are accidentally correct, that doesn't make them interesting. (I guess as long as Nathan Myhrvold is pontificating on AI at least he's not spending that time on patent trolling, so there's some upside.)

gwern 8y ago

> That applies equally well to humans. Consider the complexity class of Go. Incidentally, my arguments against this general class of attempts to neuter AI via computational complexity arguments: https://www.gwern.net/Complexity-vs-AI https://www.gwern.net/Complexity-vs-AI