Actually, I think the strong embodiment principle is essential to it: in isolation, intelligence can evolve only so far
-
-
Have you read his seminal paper? http://people.csail.mit.edu/brooks/papers/representation.pdf …
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Grady_Booch @rodneyabrooks
Sure, and I also agree that the approach of symbolic AI was wrong. Yet time has shown that Rodney Brooks and Rolf Pfeiffer were wrong too, their embodied robots did not scale towards intelligence, and destroyed the minds of half a generation.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz @rodneyabrooks
I’m note sure they exactly destroyed minds, though :-)
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Grady_Booch @rodneyabrooks
Rolf practically obliterated the epistemology of AI of my generation in Europe. Rodney's ideas were extremely influential, because they hit into a climate where expert systems had just failed and people tried to find meaning in new paradigms.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz @rodneyabrooks
I suspect people will be saying similar things a few years from now about our current crop of AI leaders :-) such is the nature of incremental progress....
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Grady_Booch @rodneyabrooks
Our current AI leaders seem to be for the most part philosophically agnostic, and motivated by the momentum generated by an extremely successful technical paradigm. Even Hinton is very humble and only tinkers around with little lego bricks.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz @rodneyabrooks
Well put. I wish I saw less focus on signal AI and more on decision making. I think we’ll see progress on introspective AI.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
My focus these days as been on embodiment and how that can yield a sense of presence, trying to grok how to grow a theory of mind in an AI, and lastly
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Approaching the systems engineering issue: how does one best connect connectionist and symbolic models of computation (for each have their advantages and disadvantages) so as to build useful, pragmatic systems.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
It will turn out that this question has been a red herring all along. Minds are a set of structural principles that can supervene on all kinds of suitably general computation, (feed forward networks are not general enough), and symbolic operations are only approximated by minds.
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.