> "We note in particular that in the sequence induction IQ tasks, our system achieves human-level performance. This is notable because the Apperception Engine was not designed to solve these IQ tasks; it is not a bespoke hand-engineered solution to this particular domain. – Rather, it is a general purpose system that attempts to make sense of any sensory sequence, that just happens to be able to solve these IQ tasks “out of the box”.
Worth repeating:
> just happens to be able to solve these IQ tasks “out of the box”.
Honest question; what could anyone get out of this? What is the point of interpreting kant if the interpreter of kant can't even perceive what humans perceive? Kant doesn't seem to have much value outside of the context of human perception.
We share a universe of perception with that thing. If it generates the same output as humans with the same input we learn that we have learned nothing and this is also knowledge of reality.
Worth repeating:
> just happens to be able to solve these IQ tasks “out of the box”.
Will read further...