4 ms·

I don't know how much long ago was "When I was much younger" but even if we go as far back as the 1960s and look at the Artificial Intelligence scientific lite

I don't know how much long ago was "When I was much younger" but even if we go as far back as the 1960s and look at the Artificial Intelligence scientific literature of that time, you'd find the understanding of what the terms they defined back then to be something far closer to what we have now, not your expectation of "the general AI that you can put in a robot body and it can learn to clean, cook, repair and chat with you"; and the philosophy has always been a key part of the science of AI even before I was born. I'm not seeing any drift of terms here - the only thing that seems to be happening for AI and AGI terms is correcting for what has happened in the sci-fi media and bringing the usage back to what it always has been in the computer science literature, now that it's closer to reality than mere fiction.

pdimitar 3y ago
No, I don't go back as far as the 1960s so if you say so I'll have to believe you. I come from a generation where AI was Skynet, Terminators, the Johny Depp's Transcendence movie AI, even HAL-9000, and other such like. I still think putting the word "intelligence" is completely dishonest however. There's nothing intelligent about what we have today, even "self-driving" cars fail very badly on what seems trivial conditions. They are a huge mish-mash of if/else chains and some statistical models sprinkled in. And please don't say "but what if human intelligence is just a chain of if/else statements and statistical models sprinkled in?" because it's very apparent and visible that it's more than that. F.ex. we can learn just from a few trials and errors whereas the so-called "AI" nowadays can't get things quite right even after billions of training sequences.