3 ms·
What's wrong with just calling them smart algorithmic models? Being smart allows somewhat to be wrong, as long as that leads to a satisfying solution. Being in
by whilenot-dev 2y ago
What's wrong with just calling them smart algorithmic models?
Being smart allows somewhat to be wrong, as long as that leads to a satisfying solution. Being intelligent on the other hand requires foundational correctness in concepts that aren't even defined yet.
EDIT: I also somewhat like the term imperative knowledge (models) [0]
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procedural_knowledge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procedural_knowledge
- jfengel 2y agoThe problem with "smart" is that they fail at things that dumb people succeed at. They have ludicrous levels of knowledge and a jaw dropping ability to connect pieces while missing what's right in front of them. The gap makes me uncomfortable with the implications of the word "smart". It is orthogonal to that.
- sigmoid10 2y ago>they fail at things that dumb people succeed at Funnily enough, you can also observe that in humans. The number of times I have observed people from highly intellectual, high income/academic families struggle with simple tasks that even the dumbest people do with ease is staggering. If you're not trained for something and suddenly confronted with it for the first time, you will also in all likelihood fail. "Smart" is just as ill-defined as any other clumsy approach to define intelligence.
- nradov 2y agoBombs can be smart, even though they sometimes miss the target.