Quote:
Originally Posted by gmw
I understand that "AI" remains something of a misnomer at this point, but it's a lot easier to say that than providing a full description of a very wide field. "AI" has always encompassed a range of different things depending on who you asked. But don't get too dismissive of many current systems being pattern matching machines, that pretty much describes a large part of the human brain. Such systems are already demonstrating many of the same problems that humans face (eg: biased input leads to biased output, and output can be deliberately manipulated by manipulating the input), which leaves one wondering just what advantages an artificial intelligence may have to offer.
|
We're in danger of heading down well-worn tracks here...
I don't understand the objection that AI can never be 'proper' intelligence because it doesn't have squishy bits, neurotransmitter chemicals etc. Planes fly but they don't flap their wings. Of course we can't define intelligence as easily as we can define flying but if I see a system that I can interact with as well as I could with a human, I'm going to call it intelligent. Yes it's all done with pattern matching but how do you think human brains work? They also have to be trained by countless hours of interaction with multiple humans to behave sensibly.
Then there's the '
Chinese room' argument which I just find plain silly. Individual neurons in our brains aren't intelligent but we call the overall system a mind. I don't see why a computer shuffling bits should be any different.
Andrew