3 ms·
>> “No, you’re missing that a fundamental aspect of intelligence is experience and that requires embodiment.” He knew that to understand the world you needed to
by marktangotango 12y ago
>> “No, you’re missing that a fundamental aspect of intelligence is experience and that requires embodiment.” He knew that to understand the world you needed to be inside the world, you needed to experience its behaviors and responses to you. Well, he was right. We may be making progress in being able to do things like recognize a cat in a photograph. But there’s a huge gulf between that and doing something creative.
I'm not sure if I agree with this, but it is a compelling argument. Could experience be simulated the first time, hence bootstrapping the AI's?
- vidarh 12y agoThere are tons of people working on giving robots the ability of collecting experience through embodiment in robots. It may be a compelling argument for why the various timelines thrown around for the singularity will be off, but it's a speed bump, not a road block.
- stephanfroede 12y agoSo goes the argumentation since 1960.
- lmm 12y agoBy the standards of 1960 we already have AI. After all, computers can beat the best humans at chess.
- crististm 12y agoby some definition of AI
- stephanfroede 12y agoA chess board is a closed system with fixed rules, as far as I know you only need a lot of computing power to apply the min-max algorithm to solve any chess game. In a chess game there are no probalities, AI is about to independently recognizing patterns in noise and develop assumptions out of it. The trick human brains are applying here is called intuition.
- lmm 12y agoThat wasn't what people said in 1960 - as soon as AIs solve a particular problem we redefine intelligence to mean something different. Modern AIs (e.g. hypothesis generation toolkits) can be better at recognizing patterns in noise than humans. I bet in 20 years' time we'll see that - and we'll be having this same conversation about how pattern recognition isn't really intelligence.