Hey Gary, this is like requiring those sitting on top of a money pyramid to call bullshit on it. Will never happen. If you want your $$$ flowing you need to shut up and go with the flow (of BS media)...
where have researchers acknowledged in print that we are a long way from natural language? & what about your own over the top comments about Google Talk to Books last week (““uncanny. Talk to a library like a person and have the library reply like a person.”) Skepticism @OpenAI?https://twitter.com/jackclarksf/status/988476362703843328 …
-
-
-
I disagree. Recall the AI winter. Exaggerated claims (rightly) lead to loss of trust. Biggest sponsor is private sector anyways and any company worth its shares will keep track of return on investment. You might get the benefit of the doubt for some time, but not forever.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I mean, it is uncanny. Lots of dumb things can be uncanny. I'm not sure why you tie uncanny to impressive?
-
Well, it does in that instance reply like a person - it replies using natural language copied from a book. I wouldn't read that tweet as a massive technological endorsement; it's uncanny in the way a mechanical turk is uncanny.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It's a good thing that you can call a spade a spade. The problem is that you, Marcus, want to add your own hybrid crap (DL + symbolic AI) to the existing crap (DL) and then pretend that you are making progress toward AGI. Truth is, you're just as clueless as the DL fanatics.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Also, the GLUE paper explicitly acknowledges this.
- 1 more reply
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.