5 ms·
> Give it five to ten years, human-like and beyond-human intelligence will be built That's probably a bit early. The Machine Intelligence Research Institute ha
by michaelkeenan 12y ago
> Give it five to ten years, human-like and beyond-human intelligence will be built
That's probably a bit early. The Machine Intelligence Research Institute has collected various surveys of experts asked about this question. The one with the earliest estimates asked the question, “Assuming beneficial political and economic development and that no global catastrophe halts progress, by what year would you assign a 10%/50%/90% chance of the development of artificial intelligence that is roughly as good as humans (or better, perhaps unevenly) at science, mathematics, engineering and programming?” Of 19 replies, the median estimates for 10%, 50%, and 90% were 2025, 2035, and 2070, respectively."
Other surveys and research are described here: http://intelligence.org/2013/05/15/when-will-ai-be-created/ http://intelligence.org/2013/05/15/when-will-ai-be-created/
- ilaksh 12y agoIf you asked those same experts in 2005 if a Jeopardy computer would beat the best human Jeopardy contestants ever in 2011, what percentage of them would go on the record with the correct answer? What is expertise today, tomorrow is passé.
- kd0amg 12y agoYes, it would have been hard for them to predict that anybody would decide to tackle that particular task. The question from GP is about a much broader range of tasks.
- pinkyand 12y agoWatson understands natural language(to some extent).That's a general capability, not a specific task.
- karmacondon 12y agoWatson was designed to answer Jeopardy questions. If Alex Trebek had used natural language to ask it anything other than a jeopardy question it would have failed spectacularly. ie, "So where are you from?". It was definitely built for one specific task.
- PeterisP 12y agoIt was tuned for that particular task, but the core tech is much more general - the current main application for which IBM is selling the Watson platform is healthcare, which is "a bit" different from answering Jeopardy questions.
- 123testaccount 12y agoNot really. "A runny nose, a fever, body aches" "What are symptoms of flu the with 75% accuracy?" That's dumbed down of course. It's probably more like "This much of this enzyme concentration in blood, that thing in urine" "What is a 17% chance of developing some condition in the next 5 years?"
- ef4 12y agoRight up until it happened, most people didn't think of "Win Jeopardy" as a particular task at all. It was seen as a "broad range of tasks".
- theworst 12y agoCorrect, but that's just because of the inherently unpredictable nature of future telling. What are the alternatives? One could simply not engage in projections, which is difficult because they're so tempting. A third option is to listen to the non-experts, which doesn't seem more valuable... This is something I struggle WRT economics. I know economists are little more than fortune tellers, but what are the other options?
- cpeterso 12y agoIn 2011, the New York Times published an interactive "wisdom of crowds" survey of future technologies: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/12/06/science/20111206-technology-timeline.html http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/12/06/science/201112...
- gnaritas 12y agoExpertise is seriously overvalued when prognosticating.
- Animats 12y agoA more useful question: How far away is Microsoft Middle Manager 3.0, from Yu's "How To Live Safely In A Science Fictional Universe"? AIs will take over when they start outperforming humans at management. When the most profitable companies are computer-run, capitalism has to let them take charge. As soon as computers can do management at all well, they may well be better at it than humans simply because they can communicate faster. There's already a hedge fund with an AI on its board. Really.