[andrewprock]

The moving of the goal posts is being done by those who claim that chess algorithm are in any sense intelligent.

The same holds for artificial intelligence broadly. It is as far from intelligence as a can opener.

[TchoBeer]

At what point would you be willing to concede that an algorithm is actually intelligent? What would be required for that?

[andrewprock]

The definition of algorithm and intelligence are mutually exclusive. Maybe you are asking a different question?

"When will we discover an algorithm for intelligence?"

[richk449]

If we understand something, we can describe it with an algorithm.

If algorithms for intelligence are by definition impossible, then understanding intelligence is by definition impossible.

So if true intelligence is something beyond our current understanding of the world (beyond algorithmic description). To me, this feels like god in the gaps applied to intelligence.

[andrewprock]

Understanding does not imply computability. The halting problem is the classic example of this.

[klmadfejno]

If a lookup table can predict human decisions with high accuracy given access to its senses and feelings, then either a human is just another can opener or intelligence isn't real.