AlphaGo Is Not AI
spectrum.ieee.org
AlphaGo Is Not AI
1–10 of 172 posts
Re: AlphaGo Is Not AI
#2The piece really makes the only point worth making in the beginning:
> What is AI and what is not AI is, to some extent, a matter of definition.
It is by the general and widely used definition that AlphaGo is actually an AI. It just happens to solve one very specific problem very well, making it a weak AI.
> Again, the rapid advances of deep learning and the recent success of this kind of AI at games like Go are very good news because they could lead to lots of really useful applications in medical research, industry, environmental preservation, and many other areas. But this is only one part of the problem, as I’ve tried to show here. I don’t believe deep learning is the silver bullet that will get us to true AI, in the sense of a machine that is able to learn to live in the world, interact naturally with us, understand deeply the complexity of our emotions and cultural biases, and ultimately help us to make a better world.
The piece was written at a time when the world was much more interested in what AlphaGo was doing and once again people were perhaps getting too excited about AI, but it really doesn't hold much value today. It may have been good to extinguish some of the misguided enthusiasm people were exhibiting back then, but no one is even talking about AlphaGo at the moment and there is little to no value in discussing what it means for strong AI anymore.
Re: AlphaGo Is Not AI
#3One of the co-founders of DeepMind (Shane Legg) has provided the following definition of intelligence: "Intelligence measures an agent’s ability to achieve goals in a wide range of environments" in [1]. This definition has been pretty influential, and in the sense of this definition, AlphaGo is not AI. But it is a great step towards AI.
[1] S. Legg, M. Hutter, Universal Intelligence: A Definition of Machine Intelligence. https://arxiv.org/abs/0712.3329
Re: AlphaGo Is Not AI
#4Good to know that quadriplegics are not intelligent, much less sentient.
Re: AlphaGo Is Not AI
#5The piece really makes the only point worth making in the beginning: > What is AI and what is not AI is, to some extent, a matter of definition. It is by the general and widely used definition that AlphaGo is actually an AI. It just happens to solve one very specific problem very well, making it a weak AI. > Again, the rapid advances of deep learning and the recent success of this kind of AI at games like Go are very…
When some people say "AI" what they really mean is "Strong AI"
Re: AlphaGo Is Not AI
#6This whole post can be (unintentionally) TL;DRed by a single Wikipedia article: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_effect
The phenomenon of people discounting significant advances as "not AI" is not new. I'm surprised it hasn't gotten old yet.
Re: AlphaGo Is Not AI
#7This whole post can be (unintentionally) TL;DRed by a single Wikipedia article: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_effect The phenomenon of people discounting significant advances as "not AI" is not new. I'm surprised it hasn't gotten old yet.
Desktop link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_effect
Re: AlphaGo Is Not AI
#8I guess that makes AlphaGo an AIdiot savant?
Re: AlphaGo Is Not AI
#9In my view, part of the fundamental problem of current AI approaches for tackling general intelligence is the inability to collate and organize different systems and algorithms together in a coherent manner.
To use a flawed but useful mode of thinking: we've succeeded at codifying crystallized intelligent systems (far beyond human means), we've made some progress on fluid intelligent systems (at worst random search), but we have not managed to make any progress on the mediator of the two. We can build a million different single purpose neural networks, but we have so few meta-classifiers for knowing which network to use at which time (and can also change track their own self-modification). Watson is possibly the closest we have at this time, but it seems to work on static information which it cannot update or improve on itself.
Re: AlphaGo Is Not AI
#10The piece really makes the only point worth making in the beginning: > What is AI and what is not AI is, to some extent, a matter of definition. It is by the general and widely used definition that AlphaGo is actually an AI. It just happens to solve one very specific problem very well, making it a weak AI. > Again, the rapid advances of deep learning and the recent success of this kind of AI at games like Go are very…
When some people say "AI" what they really mean is "Strong AI"
I'm some people and what I mean by AI is artificial intelligence. If needed I can be more precise with Weak / Strong / AGI or ASI.