3 ms·
Chomsky claims language is built-in. So probabilistic associations are the exact opposite of his claims. Interestingly, there have been some very good baby stud
by lnanek2 14y ago
Chomsky claims language is built-in. So probabilistic associations are the exact opposite of his claims. Interestingly, there have been some very good baby studies that show babies inherently know statistics needed to learn probabilistic associations. You can show them a couple different color balls going into a box, then take out a bunch of the rare color that went in, and they will register more surprise even long before they can even talk. Things like that. Chomsky's assertions are, well, what you would expect from someone that old. They didn't understand neurons and biology and genetics so well then, so yay, magic things are possible!
- rdtsc 14y ago> Chomsky claims language is built-in. In general he does. In this article he doesn't talk about he talks about approaches to AI. > there have been some very good baby studies that show babies inherently know statistics needed to learn probabilistic associations. Very good. Can we identify how that works and then build a robot that has the same mechanism in a more efficient way than simply simulating a brain at a molecular level. That is his argument here. > They didn't understand neurons and biology and genetics so well then, so yay, magic things are possible! So where were you 4-5 decades ago when he proposed his theory to propose a better one?