3 ms·
That's not really science though. Science requires developing a hypothesis. I've yet to see an AI do this. Not trying to raise the bar or anything, just sayi
by nightski 4y ago
That's not really science though. Science requires developing a hypothesis. I've yet to see an AI do this. Not trying to raise the bar or anything, just saying let's not call it scientific.
- tazjin 4y agoDeveloping a hypothesis is not the same as expressing one, though.
- refulgentis 4y agoFolding proteins is a scientific endeavour. You are raising the bar, thought I understand you wish you weren't—metaphysical questions about science, a requirement for the AI to explain any results in natural language of meatsuits, and referring to the first step of a grade school analysis of the _scientific method_ (forming a hypothesis) as a requirement for _science_, all raise the bar.
- nightski 4y agoI don't feel it was I who raised the bar. The parent citing "scientific" did. Science is a human construct in and of itself. If it is going to do science, then it needs to do so as we have defined as "the scientific method". But I would be satisfied if it developed a hypothesis in any language (including mathematics), not necessarily natural language.