2 ms·
Regardless, you probably won’t need human level, general purpose AI to drive a car. Right (most likely), but my point was -- we're not going to get there by ex
by vanusa 5y ago
Regardless, you probably won’t need human level, general purpose AI to drive a car.
Right (most likely), but my point was -- we're not going to get there by extrapolating linearly from human-beating technologies such as AlphaZero (impressive though they are). Or by stitching a few of these on top of each other.
When people talk about the AI in their video game, they’re not demanding that bots be as smart as humans.
Of course the ML/AI distinction is completely muddled in public discourse, and the marketing fluff of many startups hasn't helped either. But the point from the very beginning was: from practitioners (and journals like Nature) we should expect better.
- TulliusCicero 5y agoUh, no. We've had decades of AI being more than "how long til they think like humans?" That's not what AI is. You're talking about AGI or hard AI. Hell, even Wikiepdia makes it clear: > Artificial intelligence (AI) is intelligence demonstrated by machines, as opposed to natural intelligence displayed by animals including humans. Leading AI textbooks define the field as the study of "intelligent agents": any system that perceives its environment and takes actions that maximize its chance of achieving its goals.[a] Some popular accounts use the term "artificial intelligence" to describe machines that mimic "cognitive" functions that humans associate with the human mind, such as "learning" and "problem solving", however, this definition is rejected by major AI researchers.[b] > AI applications include advanced web search engines (e.g., Google), recommendation systems (used by YouTube, Amazon and Netflix), understanding human speech (such as Siri and Alexa), self-driving cars (e.g., Tesla), automated decision-making and competing at the highest level in strategic game systems (such as chess and Go).[2][citation needed] As machines become increasingly capable, tasks considered to require "intelligence" are often removed from the definition of AI, a phenomenon known as the AI effect.[3] For instance, optical character recognition is frequently excluded from things considered to be AI,[4] having become a routine technology.[5] Insisting that others use your non-standard definition is silly.
- vanusa 5y agoI just said, very clearly, that self-driving cars ≠ AGI and don't need to be human-like. You're browbeating me for a position I'm not taking. Weird.