3 ms·

> There is no "intelligence" here as we know it, not even a hint. There are algorithms operating on data for very prescribed use cases. I agree with your gener

> There is no "intelligence" here as we know it, not even a hint. There are algorithms operating on data for very prescribed use cases. I agree with your general point, but if you break it down, our brains a nothing "intelligent" either. It's just a network of neurons searching for patterns in the sensor input. Sure, it can reconfigure itself, but from a really abstract perspective it's nothing more than a ultra-scaled neural network as we currently use them. So this really boils down to the definition of intelligence, which is by no means easy.

omnicognate 6y ago
> it's nothing more than a ultra-scaled neural network as we currently use them You state this as if it is an undisputed/obvious fact, but it isn't.
- Sebb767 6y ago
  It does not matter for my point. Even if our NNs miss some part of neuron function, it would look comparable to a simple if/a multiplication on the smallest level. My point is that the complexity/intelligence comes from size; just because our algorithms adapt minimally or accept pre-defined scenarios, does not mean that they are fundamentally unintelligent because we're able to fully understand them.
jmfldn 6y ago
Maybe, maybe not. I'm not sure if it's just a matter of scale or of the fundamental nature of the thing. It might be that the computer / neural network metaphor, whilst isomorphic to certain brain procesees, may ultimately not tell us very much about the larger system and what it actually is. I tend to think that because computers are the current peak of civilisation / engineering, and in some ways, "alive", we think we might be like a computer. In the Victorian machine age they talked of humans as machines. Maybe some, hitherto unthinkable invention is around the corner, and we will say humans / brains are like that too.
dublin 6y ago
No, the difference is we can understand and apply knowledge in different contexts. I'm not saying machines will never mimic that (GPT3 is getting kinda close at times), but as my good friend Dewayne Perry (co-author of the most cited paper in SW engineering and Motorola Regent Chair at UTexas) says, "Artificial intelligence has a long way to go just to catch up to natural stupidity!" Try getting Alexa (famously trained daily by millions) to do anything in anything other than the predefined prescribed way. I'd wait, but I've got a life to live...

omnicognate 6y ago

> it's nothing more than a ultra-scaled neural network as we currently use them You state this as if it is an undisputed/obvious fact, but it isn't.

Sebb767 6y ago
It does not matter for my point. Even if our NNs miss some part of neuron function, it would look comparable to a simple if/a multiplication on the smallest level. My point is that the complexity/intelligence comes from size; just because our algorithms adapt minimally or accept pre-defined scenarios, does not mean that they are fundamentally unintelligent because we're able to fully understand them.

jmfldn 6y ago

Maybe, maybe not. I'm not sure if it's just a matter of scale or of the fundamental nature of the thing. It might be that the computer / neural network metaphor, whilst isomorphic to certain brain procesees, may ultimately not tell us very much about the larger system and what it actually is. I tend to think that because computers are the current peak of civilisation / engineering, and in some ways, "alive", we think we might be like a computer. In the Victorian machine age they talked of humans as machines. Maybe some, hitherto unthinkable invention is around the corner, and we will say humans / brains are like that too.

dublin 6y ago

No, the difference is we can understand and apply knowledge in different contexts. I'm not saying machines will never mimic that (GPT3 is getting kinda close at times), but as my good friend Dewayne Perry (co-author of the most cited paper in SW engineering and Motorola Regent Chair at UTexas) says, "Artificial intelligence has a long way to go just to catch up to natural stupidity!" Try getting Alexa (famously trained daily by millions) to do anything in anything other than the predefined prescribed way. I'd wait, but I've got a life to live...