Different ML researchers have different degrees of optimism, but the position that current methods will carry us all the way to general AI seems to be rare. And in public, AI skepticism has always been a much more popular position to take.
-
I’d like to know more about what standard you are using to decide who exactly “advocates of ML” and what they collectively think. The vague sense that at least someone from a large vague set of people think X is hard to falsify.
self-identification & prominence (eg publications in the field). a prominent researcher recently told me that everyone in the field already in the field acknowledged all the limits that I point out; I doubt that they have done so publicly, & I am curious to see what happens here.
-
-
But it’s hard to identify what would change your mind. By criticizing the views of a general community without identifying more clearly who and what, you can just keep saying this forever. There will always be *someone* with an overly hype soundbite you can point to.
-
this is a non sequitur, and does not address my query in any way.
- 3 more replies
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.