3 ms·
This is an article for people who don't know anything about AI (or, for that matter, CS in general). I was skeptical when it opened with the perfunctory Termin
by endtime 17y ago
This is an article for people who don't know anything about AI (or, for that matter, CS in general). I was skeptical when it opened with the perfunctory Terminator reference, and it didn't fail to disappoint.
The MSM's conflation of actually existent AI (search, learning, etc.) with AGI is becoming a real pet peeve of mine.
- ars 17y agoI'm not so convinced that the existing stuff is actually I (intelligence). So their conflation is not so wrong. But I agree that this article was a waste of time. Especially since CPU's are not getting faster, and have not for several years.
- dmix 17y agoThe article fits a general audience well. Does NYtimes ever have technical articles up to HN's par? A growing interest in AI is a positive thing. Kurizwells book on a global brain sounds interesting - the inspiration must of came from the Asimov's "The Last Question".
- ryanwaggoner 17y agoThe book on the global brain is by Kelly, not Kurzweil.
- saikat 17y agoI read technical/science articles in the NYTimes mostly out of curiosity about what the larger public thinks about these things and how all the complex research and work in technical and scientific fields gets distilled down and summarized for the mass public. I find it interesting to know what people outside of our bubble think. But, yeah, if you are reading this article seeking new information about AI, then this is a waste of time.
- endtime 17y agoI should have been clearer. It's not an article for AI-ignorami simply because it doesn't have depth; it is actively misleading.