3 ms·
>>But a system which you feed in lots of random pictures and it learns by itself what a cat is, that would be AI, least for me. A very good definition. Also ad
by kamaal 13y ago
>>But a system which you feed in lots of random pictures and it learns by itself what a cat is, that would be AI, least for me.
A very good definition. Also adding to your point. Lets say a machine is fed with a billion pictures. Can the machine automatically categorize them by reading through them? Doesn't matter if it refers to a cat as some alphanumeric name 'ab12er' or a dog as 'p09iuy'.
But it should be able to categorize them. Then it should be able to read some encyclopedia or some source of information and study the behaviors of 'ab12er' and 'p09iuy'. Or the opposite, see 'ab12er' and 'p09iuy' and recognize them and describe them what they are.
- Zenst 13y agoThing is though by giving a encyclopedia you are feeding in a bias thru a form of base reference. Thinking it thru a system could learn by itelf what a cat was, but it would not know it by that name. With that the creation of AI could be truly artifical and intellegent, but in a form we do not comprehend or even understand, yet it could be in its own right intellegent.
- polymatter 13y agoSeems to me you are defining AI as a generalized categorization algorithm. This sounds very narrow as it doesn't take into account any actual intelligent behavior. For example, I believe constructing tools in order to accomplish a specific goal (eg, constructing a net in order to catch fish) to be intelligent behavior. The categorization AI you describe would be incapable of this. Though it does sound like it would be a necessary prerequisite.