4 ms·
I like the way Chomsky breaks it down (and I'm paraphrasing): the programs that machines execute are merely theories written in archaic notations to accomplish
by contextual 13y ago
I like the way Chomsky breaks it down (and I'm paraphrasing): the programs that machines execute are merely theories written in archaic notations to accomplish specific tasks. Humans are eons away from writing and executing theories that create theories.
I agree with Chomsky that progress is needed in the realm of morality. That's where our priorities should be. It's where advancements in humanity must be made.
Furthering his example of animal testing in science experiments, hopefully animal testing will be abolished as the cruel act it is.
- aminok 13y agoPrograms are a series of instructions. I don't understand how they're theories.
- weavejester 13y ago"Theories that create theories" seems a completely arbitrary categorisation. We have software that derive predictions from records of past data. How is that not a machine creating a theory, albeit a simple one?
- mythealias 13y agoI believe the difference is same as fitting a curve to a data and then predicting the result versus figuring out the physics behind the data and using that to predict the result. I would consider the latter as the AI. The former is just deriving possible result from a set of rules and how to combine them, which might be smart but is still lacks AI in strictest sense.
- weavejester 13y agoIf the prediction is good enough, and general enough, then I'd argue that is figuring out the physics behind the data.
- contextual 13y agoWhat you're speaking of is a brute force mono-function program with no creativity or context.
- weavejester 13y agoThe brute force approach is only feasible for small amounts of data. For larger data sets, often it's an iterative approach using general-purpose algorithms, combined with some degree of randomisation. I'd argue that describes how the human brain operates as well.