I think part of my skepticism re: 'AI' (I was calling it 'Artificial Cognition' but I'm not sure even that's appropriate now) is precisely due to the impractical nature of those typical to the field—i.e. computer scientists, who are essentially a kind of mathematician…
I agree it doesn’t help to call it “AI” rather than “Machine Learning”/“Expert Systems”. What is possible? I don’t know. But thinking about Taleb, who says the engineers beat the pure matheticiaisn through history, I’d put my money on the practical “AI” guys cracking sentience.https://twitter.com/mfckr_/status/1001797170247405568 …
-
-
-
Which entails a certain mindset geared towards rigorous formalization—incredibly useful to have as a logician. Especially so when dealing with (normal) computers, which necessarily operate according to a very strict set of fixed programmatic rules.
-
Anyhow, while I'm sure many AI developers understand the medium of computation superbly well—I'm not sure they're being honest with themselves that their renditions of intelligence are (operationally) meaningful, nor whether inherent limitations of computing even allow this.
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.