3 ms·

That's the point. If we had good and intuitive models of how a system works, we could simply write a program to calculate whatever result we were looking for. T

by jjk166 4y ago

That's the point. If we had good and intuitive models of how a system works, we could simply write a program to calculate whatever result we were looking for. The purpose of AI is to look at data and find patterns that the human mind struggles to pick up thus allowing us to make accurate predictions without understanding the underlying rules. In the early days of AI when we were basically just practicing, we applied them to problems that we knew the answers to because we understood the underlying rules, and thus could see easily how close AIs got to accurately learning these rules. But now as AI has graduated to the level where it can be used for real world applications, of course now it is successfully doing its job of figuring out relations which are not only difficult to spot but also difficult to turn into an intuitive narrative.

mdp2021 4y ago
> The purpose of AI ... patterns No. That is just some model of AI. I think I should advise following the publicly available MIT course of late Prof. Patrick Winston. > as AI has graduated to the level where it can be used for real world applications I am pretty sure we had applications in the '50s. > it is successfully ... figuring out relations which are not only difficult to spot but also difficult to turn into an intuitive narrative And we would like to know them, for many reasons. Because in some cases what we are looking for is the full solution as opposed to the conclusion; because we do not just trust advice blindly; because it is productive in the very engineering effort...
- jjk166 4y ago
  > No. That is just some model of AI. Finding patterns in data without being told explicitly what to look for is the hallmark of AI. Anything that doesn't do that isn't AI. > I am pretty sure we had applications in the '50s. For a different definition of applications than the one I was clearly using, yes. > And we would like to know them, for many reasons. Because in some cases what we are looking for is the full solution as opposed to the conclusion; because we do not just trust advice blindly; because it is productive in the very engineering effort... And I would like my car not to crash, but that's not the point of a seatbelt. Of course it would be wonderful if we understood everything, but we don't, and so we have created a tool to let us overcome that limitation.
  - mdp2021 4y ago
    > Finding patterns in data without being told explicitly No, really, it isn't. "Automation of solutions" is not equivalent to "pattern recognition". A first factual example that comes to mind are "Expert Systems", which appear far from your idea of AI like something in another continent: please, as already invited, re-check the history of AI. > that's not the point of a seatbelt Whereas instead, realiability of solutions and "scientific" progress can be exactly the point of some applications, or a fundamental parallel activity in the enterprise that develops them.

by jjk166 4y ago

mdp2021 4y ago

> The purpose of AI ... patterns No. That is just some model of AI. I think I should advise following the publicly available MIT course of late Prof. Patrick Winston. > as AI has graduated to the level where it can be used for real world applications I am pretty sure we had applications in the '50s. > it is successfully ... figuring out relations which are not only difficult to spot but also difficult to turn into an intuitive narrative And we would like to know them, for many reasons. Because in some cases what we are looking for is the full solution as opposed to the conclusion; because we do not just trust advice blindly; because it is productive in the very engineering effort...

jjk166 4y ago
> No. That is just some model of AI. Finding patterns in data without being told explicitly what to look for is the hallmark of AI. Anything that doesn't do that isn't AI. > I am pretty sure we had applications in the '50s. For a different definition of applications than the one I was clearly using, yes. > And we would like to know them, for many reasons. Because in some cases what we are looking for is the full solution as opposed to the conclusion; because we do not just trust advice blindly; because it is productive in the very engineering effort... And I would like my car not to crash, but that's not the point of a seatbelt. Of course it would be wonderful if we understood everything, but we don't, and so we have created a tool to let us overcome that limitation.
- mdp2021 4y ago
  > Finding patterns in data without being told explicitly No, really, it isn't. "Automation of solutions" is not equivalent to "pattern recognition". A first factual example that comes to mind are "Expert Systems", which appear far from your idea of AI like something in another continent: please, as already invited, re-check the history of AI. > that's not the point of a seatbelt Whereas instead, realiability of solutions and "scientific" progress can be exactly the point of some applications, or a fundamental parallel activity in the enterprise that develops them.