3 ms·
> It can't avoid that because it doesn't know what the words _mean_. That’s true of a fair number of humans, too.
by commandlinefan 4y ago
> It can't avoid that because it doesn't know what the words _mean_.
That’s true of a fair number of humans, too.
- sidlls 4y agoThis is an uncharitable description of human understanding: your statement is simply not true in this context.
- arbitrage 4y ago> your statement is simply not true in this context. Thanks for clearing up the misconception with your cogent and well-reasoned reply.
- mdp2021 4y ago> true of a fair number of humans, too And your conclusion would be? If they show to have what it takes we will call them intelligent, otherwise unintelligent. Some seem to want to cling to a weak definition of intelligence, covering all sentient beings in compassion - but we are engineering /tools/, things that have to be effective, "have what it takes"... This puts the "intelligence" of the narcoleptic carp in a special corner with little relevance to the context.