And this learning computer is dramatically more complex than any we have been able to build. Ever. Without comparison.
-
-
Replying to @EmilyGorcenski
And we expect our artificial mimics to come in, despite barely understanding *them*, train for far less time, developing far less ability...
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @EmilyGorcenski
Using algorithms that were basically invented 50 years ago
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @EmilyGorcenski
To come in and save humanity from its problems. Would you trust a five year old to negotiate a peace treaty?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @EmilyGorcenski
Artificial neural nets, along with other similar machine learning techniques, are wonderful, amazing, useful tools. I love them!
1 reply 3 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @EmilyGorcenski
But can we stop with the comparisons to a biology we do not understand? And the rosy visions of the future that whitewash their limitations?
1 reply 2 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @EmilyGorcenski
Neural nets are not AI. They are not surrogate people. They cannot replace empathy. They follow gradients we can't picture, that's all.
1 reply 2 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @EmilyGorcenski
I agree with all but the characterization of babies. They learn constantly, but not single subject or 100% of the time.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @dustyburwell
right, but like that's kind of the point. They're learning all this other stuff and using it to frame context and meaning.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @EmilyGorcenski
and to think, even with all that context, a lot of them turn out to be terrible.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
