Live data from Hacker News

Artificial Intelligence Is Stuck

nytimes.com

181–189 of 189 posts

Re: Artificial Intelligence Is Stuck

#181
post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

RNNs are a good model for things that are naturally sequential with limited state transfer. They are not so elegant for things with no defined ordering and a large amount of shared state.

Can you give an example of a problem where you have "no defined ordering and a large amount of shared state"? What kind of model is typically used in that domain?

One problem I've been considering is triangle surface meshes. The data is variable in size, with no defined start or end point, where points distant on the surface may share a high amount of mutual information (through symmetry, etc).

One approach I've thought about is applying kernel methods. You can compose kernels, so they scale up cleanly regardless of variations in the input dimension. The sum or product of kernels between each node in the input graph and some basis set is itself a kernel. If your kernels describe covariance between observations (i.e. Gaussian processes) then additional input dimensions have a constraining effect, rather than causing evidence inflation for larger inputs as a typical neural network might.

Re: Artificial Intelligence Is Stuck

#182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you describe what you mean by "he doesn't understand"? His background is in psychology and neuro science so his view on intelligence is probably quite different than person coming from computer science. For me he puts words onto something I've felt recently, that what we're doing is cool and all, but just doesn't feel like the right way to approach it. We're just putting loads of data and computing power into som…

Your concern about "the right way to approach it" is getting closer to the real conflict which is not in the "way" but in what "it" is. In your mind, what is the desired goal or outcome for AI R&D? If your objectives are in medicine, cognitive science or philosophy of the mind, you might want simulations which are isomorphic to biological minds. You probably hope that AI work will provide illumination into how the mi…

great perspective! My desired goals are more in something like cognitive science.. I think most of my grumpiness about this is not that things arent progressing (check out Santa Fe Institut and their work on complexity) it's just that AlphaGo and self driving cars are getting all the attention

Re: Artificial Intelligence Is Stuck

#183
post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Philosophers have been saying this for 60 years Hubert Dreyfus' 1972 book "What Computers Can't Do" is a notable example.

It's alright, but I don't recall the book articulating actions computers cannot do. It seemed to still leave open the possibility that we can automate all human work. What we need is a precise task that humans can do with ease but we can prove is impossible for any computational device whatsoever.

My understanding was that he thinks we can potentially automate all human work, just not with computers. A precise task isn't necessary: AI researchers are simply mistaken about the nature of intelligence.

Re: Artificial Intelligence Is Stuck

#184
post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's alright, but I don't recall the book articulating actions computers cannot do. It seemed to still leave open the possibility that we can automate all human work. What we need is a precise task that humans can do with ease but we can prove is impossible for any computational device whatsoever.

My understanding was that he thinks we can potentially automate all human work, just not with computers. A precise task isn't necessary: AI researchers are simply mistaken about the nature of intelligence.

Dreyfus doesn't know his comp sci. Everything automatable is computable. The interesting question is whether human intelligence is automatable.

Re: Artificial Intelligence Is Stuck

#185
post #177
post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's alright, but I don't recall the book articulating actions computers cannot do. It seemed to still leave open the possibility that we can automate all human work. What we need is a precise task that humans can do with ease but we can prove is impossible for any computational device whatsoever.

Self awareness?

That's not a task per se. What I mean is a technical task.

Re: Artificial Intelligence Is Stuck

#186
post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding was that he thinks we can potentially automate all human work, just not with computers. A precise task isn't necessary: AI researchers are simply mistaken about the nature of intelligence.

Dreyfus doesn't know his comp sci. Everything automatable is computable. The interesting question is whether human intelligence is automatable.

>everything automatable is computable

why do you suppose this?

Re: Artificial Intelligence Is Stuck

#187
post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dreyfus doesn't know his comp sci. Everything automatable is computable. The interesting question is whether human intelligence is automatable.

>everything automatable is computable why do you suppose this?

Everything physical is computable.

Re: Artificial Intelligence Is Stuck

#188
post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>everything automatable is computable why do you suppose this?

Everything physical is computable.

So you have to prove that all human work is physical when some of it doesn't seem to be physical at all (creative work).

Re: Artificial Intelligence Is Stuck

#189
post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything physical is computable.

So you have to prove that all human work is physical when some of it doesn't seem to be physical at all (creative work).

Yes the non-physical work is not automatable.
Post reply on HN