right on, @noelsharkey: machines haven’t really gotten smarter, just better at a broader range of narrow tasks.https://twitter.com/noelsharkey/status/1001005662334345216 …
-
What would you call a human who continuously gets better at a broader range of narrow tasks? Smarter? Picture a near-vertical line just entering the range of recognizably human concerns. Not extrapolating from ML: we have an existence proof - ourselves.
I would refer human that could play Breakout with the paddle at y = 9 pixels but not y = 19 pixels to a neurologist, but @dileeplearning has shown that one of the best known algorithms are time does exactly that. no healthy human is anywhere near that inflexible.
-
-
Well sure. No current algorithm, or more appropriately, no currently deployable configuration of algorithms, is "smart" compared to a human (or a dog). Says nothing about whether "getting smarter" is meaningful and true statement wrt AI.
-
I actually think that it is a category.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.