3 ms·
As an anthropologist you are in theory studying humans from out of a shared cultural context and it is easy to argue that a machine which hasn't even the slight
by robotbikes 7y ago
As an anthropologist you are in theory studying humans from out of a shared cultural context and it is easy to argue that a machine which hasn't even the slightest semblance of a shared cultural context would not be capable of distinguishing a twitch from a wink with 100% reliability. Not all human gestures are universal either so even if you trained your AI to read faces it would likely be trained on a small subset of human cultures and would produce varying results. In regards to the greater question of knowing intention I'd agree that algorithms do a much poorer job of guessing my intention than me directly communicating it and I am annoyed that so much of our on-line communication is filtered by algorithmic social engagement that an encourages shallow interactions.
- madsbuch 7y agoThis sounds the the classical "intelligence being something people have". It is futile to talk about 100% correctness in this field > ... machine which hasn't even the slightest semblance of a shared cultural context ... Why is this universally true? > ... it would likely be trained on a small subset of human cultures and would produce varying results. As it has when you travel to foreign countries. There is not such hing as understanding artificial intelligence. There is a task of understanding _intelligence_ and attempting to implement it without giving birth.