If you can define intelligence in sufficiently precise terms, its implementation becomes easier.
Show this thread
-
Failure to move forward is often not due to a lack of problem-solving capacity, but to failure of properly articulating goals, formulating relevant questions, and following appropriate measures of success.
Show this thread
If the only successes of AI have been in developing narrow task-specific systems, it is because only within a highly specialized and grounded context are we able to *define the goal* sufficiently precisely, and to *measure progress*. "General AI" is far too vague to be actionable
-
-
The solution must be co-evolved with the problem definition.
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Except for the final part of this assertion.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Nils Nilsson highlighted similar criticisms of AI [and had his responses in brackets] in the early 1970spic.twitter.com/OX1sH1Cy7I
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
One possibly actionable definition of “General AI” is the sum total of “narrow AIs” in existence at any given moment.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
True, as it is being approached now. Needlessly true. Our AI specialists are themselves rarely generalists, so it's easy to see why. Perhaps...they should consider hiring Organic Intelligence generalists...
Tiring to see things slip through fingers. It's all there. 
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.