3 ms·
AI is limited more by language than anything else. NLP which I do a lot of work on at http://plexinlp.com http://plexinlp.com goes a long way, but the computer
by drakaal 13y ago
AI is limited more by language than anything else. NLP which I do a lot of work on at http://plexinlp.com http://plexinlp.com goes a long way, but the computer doesn't have the ability to get metaphors, or sarcasm, or have any sort of "BS" detection.
CoreNLP (which isn't as good as our NLP but is the "standard" only gets the parts of speech right 95% of the time, by words, but about 75% of the time by sentence. Imagine you were a waiter and you only understood 75% of sentences. You'd not last too long.
But somehow we expect computers which not only are limited to 75% of sentences being "tagged" correctly, but then not having any idea about the concepts behind them.
AI as we see it today is not so much "AI" as it is Computer Driven Bucketing. Build a formula that gets as many things in to pre-sorted buckets as possible. For me it isn't AI until the computer can make leaps of its own. Create a new bucket and explain why it was needed, or create a new solution that wasn't proposed by the programmer.
I am working hard to bring all of that to fruition, but honestly we are a long ways off.
Here are some milestones I think we will need to hit before we get to AI.
Software powerful enough to convert Wikipedia (or any knowledgebase) to structured Data automatically.
Query system that takes any user input and converts it to something resembling a Database query (This is what I'm working on)
NPC's for Games/MMO's etc that pass a turring test with in the limits of their Virtual world. (Basically they don't have to pass for real, just as real as the DnD character a human would play)
These are really "simple" milestones that are the step before we see true AI start to work.
- hershel 13y agoBut why do we need to judge ai by our language? if were dealing with data and images, machine learning does do impressive things,including things that if were done by researchers would have certainly gotten them a place inside respectable academic journals. For example ,a machine learning algorithm devised a new internet protocol that doubles the network capacity over best known methods.Another famous machine learning system understood own it's own how to classify images what belongs to the bucket of "cat" and many other object types. Why isn't this enough to be considered intelligent?
- drakaal 13y agoBecause those aren't Intelligent, they are just "handy". Sorting doesn't require intelligence. You have X number of attributes and using them you do your best to get as many things in to "Like" buckets as possible. Discovering new attributes is the start of intelligence. Discovering new buckets could be intelligence. If the machine gets 100k pictures and can sort them in to Cat vs No Cat, and then suggests a new set of classification "Indoors vs outdoors" using attributes the developer didn't pre-identify that would be intelligence.
- hershel 13y agoGoogle's famous experiment did something similar: it offered the machine plenty of content(from youtube) and the machine on it's own discovered the category "cat", and others.
- drakaal 13y agoYou don't seem to want to have a discussion. So this is my last comment. It was given all the possible traits. It didn't find a new category it had a collection of things with known traits. Google knew it would be able to find cats using the traits it was given. That's not intelligence on the computer's side. If I tell you that there are things with lungs, things with gills, things with legs and things with arms, things with hair, I don't have to tell you there are mermaids and salamanders, you will figure it out when not everything fits in the bucket of Cats and goldfish.