[michaelteter]

I don't think making humans comfortable is the goal with respect to AI. The goal is to actually solve a problem. Performance is second. Human comfort is a distant third or beyond.

When AI can reliably solve a problem without significant negative consequenses from time to time, it's a win. How humans feel about the method is effectively irrelevant.

[oivey]

The near miss behavior is very much like overfitting. Mario is simple and deterministic enough that it doesn’t matter, but think about a scenario like a self driving car. A calculated near miss turns into a crash if the other car’s driver is just a little slower or their tires a little slicker than anticipated.

[pedrosorio]

> I don't think making humans comfortable is the goal with respect to AI

According to whom?

AI in games, has historically been all about human comfort/enjoyment. Extremely good AI that seems "unnatural" to humans is usually not the goal.

[tzot]

You seem to talk about AI-controlled-NPCs in games, while GP starts from the article context about AI-controlled-PCs (player characters) and proceeds to generalize about using AI to solve problems outside games.

[rootw0rm]

I think the point is that different people have different goals for "AI"