[JoeAltmaier]

Because, they can't invent a new game. Unless of course they were only designed to invent games, and by trial and error and statistical correlation to existing games, thus producing a generic thing that relates to everything but invents nothing.

I'm not an idiot. I understand that we won't have general purpose thinking machines any time soon. But to give up entirely looking into that kind of thing, seems to me to be a mistake. To rebrand the entire field as calculating results to given problems and behaviors using existing mathematical tools, seems to do a disservice to the entire concept and future of artificial intelligence.

Imagine if the field of mathematics were stumped for a while, so investigators decided to just add up things faster and faster, and call that Mathematics.

[visarga]

What GPT-3 and other models lack is embodiment. There are of course RL agents embodied in simulated environments, like games and robot sims, but this pales in comparison to our access to nature and the human society. When we will be able to give them a body they will naturally rediscover play and games.

Human superiority doesn't come just from the brain, it comes from the environment this brain has access to - other humans, culture, tools, nature, and the bodily affordances (hands, feet, eyes, ability to assimilate organic food...). AI needs a body and an environment to evolve in.