3 ms·
> Ergo, what we think of as AI is really the attempt to make one kind of human thought imitate all the others. From that POV it's kind of foolish, almost a feti
by FartyMcFarter 6y ago
> Ergo, what we think of as AI is really the attempt to make one kind of human thought imitate all the others. From that POV it's kind of foolish, almost a fetish.)
That is a very interesting way to think about it!
However I disagree that it is foolish, simply because there's at least some amount of belief on the part of scientists that computers can simulate physics to any arbitrary degree of precision. If this is the case, then it follows that computers can imitate all of human thought (not just one kind of it), since humans are physical beings.
- carapace 6y agoWell, it seems foolish to me to argue over whether something a computer does "really is" AI if they have been AI the whole time. Really, we're arguing about how the logical/rational part of the brain can emulate the other capabilities of the brain, which seems less interesting than the more general question of how to build any machine that can do that. Consider BEAM robotics: > BEAM robotics (from biology, electronics, aesthetics and mechanics) is a style of robotics that primarily uses simple analogue circuits, such as comparators, instead of a microprocessor in order to produce an unusually simple design. While not as flexible as microprocessor based robotics, BEAM robotics can be robust and efficient in performing the task for which it was designed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BEAM_robotics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BEAM_robotics > ...computers can imitate all of human thought (not just one kind of it), since humans are physical beings. Leaving aside the metaphysical questions it raises, we may well be able to build virtual humans someday by emulation of physics of the biology of the neurology of the psychology of people. It just might not be the most efficient way to do it, eh?