3 ms·

There are no superhuman craftsman AI. Something that could in one package: - hold a conversation about what it is that needs to be done - clean a room - fix

There are no superhuman craftsman AI. Something that could in one package: - hold a conversation about what it is that needs to be done - clean a room - fix a sink - make a chair or table out of wood - dig a hole We don't know how to make AI that will learn to play even simple game like montezuma's revenge in some reasonable play time like 30 min. We are currently closer to months or years of gameplay required.

dragontamer 5y ago
> We don't know how to make AI that will learn to play even simple game like montezuma's revenge in some reasonable play time like 30 min. Explain to me why a Tool-assisted Speedrun doesn't count as "AI". Its certainly not a human who is playing that (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFB0kuPx5mQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFB0kuPx5mQ). > Something that could in one package: I'm not sure if that sort of thing is worth the investment. But if we have "Fly the F35 airframe" (which is incredibly unstable), then we suddenly reach "only computers can fly this thing" levels. Just the assumption of super-human control systems is baked into modern products. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyN-CRNrb3E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyN-CRNrb3E Our cell phones are largely manufactured by machines these days. A few tidbits here and there remain in human hands for cheapness... but a lot of today's stuff is basically an AI. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRu02F6AOmg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRu02F6AOmg
- qsort 5y ago
  > Explain to me why a Tool-assisted Speedrun doesn't count as "AI". Its certainly not a human who is playing that (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFB0kuPx5mQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFB0kuPx5mQ). Because TAS are made by human speedrunners, who go through the painstaking process of specifying inputs for each frame. I'm not sure what you're trying to say here, TAS are basically the exact opposite of AI. > I'm not sure if that sort of thing... > But if we have "Fly the F35 airframe"... > Our cell phones are largely manufactured by machines... That's a red herring. There's plenty of evidence we can make very useful narrow AI in many fields, and nobody is arguing against that. The point is, they are, well, narrow. What your parent is saying is that there's no evidence that the statistical techniques behind the current wave of AI are capable of anything else. To paraphrase Norvig, it could well be that we're trying to get to the moon by climbing a tree, reporting steady progress all the way to the top of the tree.

dragontamer 5y ago

> We don't know how to make AI that will learn to play even simple game like montezuma's revenge in some reasonable play time like 30 min. Explain to me why a Tool-assisted Speedrun doesn't count as "AI". Its certainly not a human who is playing that (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFB0kuPx5mQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFB0kuPx5mQ). > Something that could in one package: I'm not sure if that sort of thing is worth the investment. But if we have "Fly the F35 airframe" (which is incredibly unstable), then we suddenly reach "only computers can fly this thing" levels. Just the assumption of super-human control systems is baked into modern products. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyN-CRNrb3E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyN-CRNrb3E Our cell phones are largely manufactured by machines these days. A few tidbits here and there remain in human hands for cheapness... but a lot of today's stuff is basically an AI. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRu02F6AOmg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRu02F6AOmg

qsort 5y ago
> Explain to me why a Tool-assisted Speedrun doesn't count as "AI". Its certainly not a human who is playing that (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFB0kuPx5mQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFB0kuPx5mQ). Because TAS are made by human speedrunners, who go through the painstaking process of specifying inputs for each frame. I'm not sure what you're trying to say here, TAS are basically the exact opposite of AI. > I'm not sure if that sort of thing... > But if we have "Fly the F35 airframe"... > Our cell phones are largely manufactured by machines... That's a red herring. There's plenty of evidence we can make very useful narrow AI in many fields, and nobody is arguing against that. The point is, they are, well, narrow. What your parent is saying is that there's no evidence that the statistical techniques behind the current wave of AI are capable of anything else. To paraphrase Norvig, it could well be that we're trying to get to the moon by climbing a tree, reporting steady progress all the way to the top of the tree.