|
|
|
|
|
|
by f_klem
8 days ago
|
|
|
I'm not trying to convince anyone. I am just baffled that a large part of the tech/software and AI research community do not question their own assumptions, when those assumptions are being actively questioned in other fields (namely, philosophy and linguistics). Reaching AGI or human-level intelligence might be possible, but not on the basis of dismissing what other fields already said something about. That is arrogant, and does not help. Even more, this has already happened in the 60s/70s. And I say 'might be possible' precisely because I pay attention to what other fields have to say. |
|
|
Why are you so concerned about it? If philosophers and linguists are right, then what the sequence of evens should we expect? AI developments will slow down and stop, AI bubble will burst, and AI researchers will be humiliated and forced to accept their failings.
> That is arrogant, and does not help. Even more, this has already happened in the 60s/70s.
Exactly like that time. Or maybe we should say "those times". Doesn't matter really.