I don't find the example right now, but you can give AIs just some pixels they would classify as dog or whatever. A human would only classify something that has

I don't find the example right now, but you can give AIs just some pixels they would classify as dog or whatever. A human would only classify something that has the attributes of a dog as a dog. That's a difference from corner cases and unclear dress examples "If you want to compare fairly, you'd have to do so with a human that's never spoken to anyone, never seen anything but 2D pictures on a screen in front of them and hasn't been told or shown anything about the world they live in since they were born" And this is not what is happening with AIs. They get fed with data that sums up more than a single human lifespan. ", but still even more elaborate tests like ones for say, math or physics that have you write the entire procedure don't really test if you understand the underlying principles" And this is not true, except for high school tests. You certainly can test for understanding, by not giving generic problems, but where you have to apply your knowlege. And sure those were the most hated tests, as they required actual understanding and you could nvot weasel through. But they also created more work for teachers, so mosts tests were just the generic have you learned the algorithm tests. And if testing in person, you can go deep.