26 ms·
The lack of AI progress in the last 30 years is not a good sign. You're also ignoring things like the materials that have come out of studying the pads on geck
by elemenohpee 15y ago
The lack of AI progress in the last 30 years is not a good sign. You're also ignoring things like the materials that have come out of studying the pads on geckos' feet.
- burgerbrain 15y agoThere has not been a lack of AI progress in the past 30 years, but rather some sort of 'True Scottsman'-esque raised expectations phenomenon. Natural language processing, computer vision, etc have seen dramatic improvements in recent years but every time there is an improvement people say "well that's just standard stuff, not real AI". As long as a technology is real, people seem weirdly unwilling to accept that it is also an example of AI. The "real stuff" seems to include "fictional" as an integral part of it's definition.
- lutorm 15y agoWell, when people say AI, I think "Turing Test", not computer vision.
- burgerbrain 15y agoBut surely you actually understand that there is more to the field than emulating humans.
- lutorm 15y agoI guess that's a matter of definition. If humans are the only example of "intelligence" that we know of, then it seems natural that artificial intelligence would concern emulating humans.
- esrauch 15y agoI'm pretty sure we have made pretty big strides in achieving the Turning test in the last 25 years.
- rat 15y agoI'm sure there are a number of bots that are able to fool people a lot of the time and many have been around for a long time, but that isn't what people think of when you say AI.
- elemenohpee 15y agoI'm specifically talking about general AI. I don't think we're any closer to that than when the problem was first posed. Although I'm willing to change my mind if you make a good argument for it.