2 ms·
> People drive vision only. No we don't. We have vision which we then interpret with our _minds_. We have the ability to _understand_ what we are seeing, reaso
by ibeckermayer 8y ago
> People drive vision only.
No we don't. We have vision which we then interpret with our _minds_. We have the ability to _understand_ what we are seeing, reason from it, and make decisions accordingly. "Deep Learning", no matter how big your dataset, fundamentally cannot possess this capability. Which goes a long way into explaining why Tesla's "self driving" tech keeps on killing people in situations that are trivially simple for humans. There's no way to rigorously test for edge cases in opaque deep learning algorithms, nor is there any way to implement redundancy as there is in ordinary deterministic systems.
This is a mad attempt to replace human cognition with "AI".
- paulrosenzweig 8y ago> "Deep Learning", no matter how big your dataset, fundamentally cannot possess this capability. Why not? I’d agree that current models can’t, but what’s the fundamental shortcoming of deep learning?
- ibeckermayer 8y agoThe fundamental shortcoming is that there can be no understanding, and therefore no judgement, because there is no mind. See Searle's [in]famous Chinese Room Argument (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/chinese-room/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/chinese-room/). Or for a more concrete example from today: https://twitter.com/mit_csail/status/1121447605412741120?s=21 https://twitter.com/mit_csail/status/1121447605412741120?s=2...
- lojack 8y agoI question how much of our driving is logic and analytics based as opposed to instinct and reaction based.