| The problem with AI is that the word has become layman-y. AI at a glance seems so heavily focused on both technical aspects (ie. computing power), and modeling a human's cognitive train off thought. So many neural networks around which outwit/out-strategize humans, but how about other aspects humans use to solve problems. People doing something "crazy", based on a "gut instinct" for example. I have yet to see a serious neural network (company/research) that models "gut feelings", because in the "real world", many people have found success and solved problems/made decisions in every branch and form based on a "gut feeling". To add a few more to the list, I'd love for someone to give me a link to a neural network emulating the following traits which very much have proven to drive humans to advancement and problem solving: - intuition - motivation - "taste"(opinion) - empathy; A judge reducing or increasing sentence based on the intricacies off an isolated situation, and not on pure objectivity (IE. 1 murder 5 years, 2 murder 10 years etc.) The law seldom is this absolute, precisely because off human traits, and being able to acknowledge and take into account this variable is a case off empathy moreso than math / logical deduction. Nuance by it's very definition is not absolute. - inspiration - hope etc. A different perspective: Imagine your on a springboard at the pool for the first time. You don't have any memory off you doing a jump on your brain's "hard drive", so the uncertainty and the fear off jumping is valid. A computer might end up in a crash, because it loops infinitely false, until a memory is found containing the info that a jump can be successful, which will never come. However, you look behind u, and there is social pressure to jump. The fear off being laughed at intervenes in this loop, and u make the jump. Humans rarely "crash", because we are not as bound to logic as a computer. This is why a computer excels in terms off reliability with math. Because a computer is absolute, 1 + 1 will always result in 2 on every calculator ever, but as soon as unknown parameters are introduced, it becomes that much more difficult to keep it running. Our emotional side is as double edged as can be, without it we would crash if we can't logically solve something, but equally reduce reliability ("human error"), when emotions overrule logic entirely. Off course one might say, just solve it with an automatic breakout after 10 iterations, but now you wrote an (conscious) edge case. Humans improvise. I think almost every person has been in or witnessed a situation, where they (logically/rationally) concluded that "he should not do it / bad odds", then proceed to see this person make it anyway resulting in succes. TLDR; AI has seen many advancement, modeling a humans capability off functions that can be compared to a humans prefrontal cortex, but the hippocampus, amygdala, cerebellum to name a few are parts which I have yet to see a promising existing computer version off, but are vital to our ability to become as a race to the point where we are at. As a final anecdote, there was this guy which through an accident had his brain split between the front and the rest (emotional parts). Nurses came in with 2 meals to choose from, but he could no decide. The nurses found this peculiar.. "just pick one", but he just froze, BSOD on them. He said there was no logical reason to pick one or the other. He's absolutely right, there isn't, yet he'd die if he doesn't pick one. Our brain never ends up in absolute false. When it does, emotions pick up and solve it, perhaps imperfectly, but "life goes on". |