|
|
|
|
|
by AndrewKemendo
3039 days ago
|
|
You still have nothing more than a system of systems of optimization algos. If you think this is what intelligence is, I'm not sure what to say. Until someone comes up with a better definition of intelligence that's what I'm sticking with. I think you're looking for an elegant solution right out of the box - the "one algorithm to rule them all" and I don't think that is feasible from an engineering perspective if for no other reason than no singular system has anything near the data collection nodes needed for specificity on the range of tasks that would suffice any definition of "General." Having raised three other humans and observing them while building DL systems myself for a living, I feel more strongly everyday that human intelligence is a hodgepodge of "weak AI" systems glued together with an exceptionally efficient executive function. AGI is as much a community building and humanity wide input collection challenge as it is a math problem. We need to think about it that way. |
|
I’m in complete agreement with this. I try to avoid AGI discussions because people get upset when I argue that the vast majority of human “intelligence” seems to be strong pattern matching, and we can’t really define the parts that aren’t in any useful way.
Take the person you are discussing this with. The majority of their point seems to be a hang-up on the word “intelligence”.
I find that a pointless thing to argue over. Just agree and say it is an intelligence simulator which is indistinguishable from a real intelligence.