Most certainly we will see the comeback of "logical" AI too, including systems built on Prolog.
Prolog horror intensifies
The AI Revolution Hasn’t Happened Yet
101–110 of 166 posts
Re: The AI Revolution Hasn’t Happened Yet
#102The main problem with “AI revolution” today is that 95% of things that practitioners tell you it can do are just nowhere close to sufficient accuracy under the range of conditions they’d need to work in in the real world. Easily more than a half of them don’t even work at all outside a demo with hand picked examples. And nobody seems to care. This narrows down the scope of applicability to a tiny sliver where you can…
All the more concerning that the Pentagon plans to have autonomous killing machines "ready" this year (hint: they won't actually be ready, but it's not like they'll tell us how many innocents they'll actually kill, especially with their very loose definitions of what a target is. They are yet to do that with the manual ones after all). https://thenextweb.com/syndication/2018/04/16/drones-will-so...
Killing is one of those scenarios where high error rate is no big deal, as long as there are no Americans on the ground. /s
Re: The AI Revolution Hasn’t Happened Yet
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
Humans are _amazing_ because they are able to correct the deficiencies of their perception with high level cognition augmented with memory of past experience. Machines can’t do cognition, and they can’t effectively use past experience either, to say nothing of doing a combination of those two things. Current “AI” is basically function approximation and nothing else. And humans do everything they do in a 20W power env…
"they can’t effectively use past experience either" While I'm unsure whether the on board computer of your autonomous car will be able to leverage past experience, I thought it was a forgone conclusion that the telemetry from all the cars on the road will be used to iteratively improve the core model. Which would then be dispersed as an os upgrade, effectively teaching your individual unit from the past experience fr…
But it’s not memory. Currently you just show your neural net a million examples of a thing and it derives a function which, given an example input, minimizes the output error. That’s it. It’s not like “last time I caught a ball in a similar situation I moved like this, so let me start with that and correct based on visuals, audio, proprioception, and cognition”, all within 20 milliseconds, before you even fully understand you’re about to catch a ball. That’s not to mention that you also maintain the illusion of a continuous and static visual field, without even noticing, in stereo.
Re: The AI Revolution Hasn’t Happened Yet
#104...AND IT WON'T for a VERY LONG TIME. Those of us who know the origins of Ray Kurzweil, knew back then he was nothing special, and his ideas were derived from much smarter people around him. As I recall, the article in WIRED from like 20 years ago, talked about how he missed his dad, and how in the future you would be able to take a room full of all his dad's old crap, and AI would be able to recompile his dad into d…
I've discovered recently the lectures of Prof. Jordan Peterson. You can infer a lot of links between human behavior and shortcomings of AI. In some lectures he even touches the actual problems although on a tangent (e.g. what is relevant in the infinite complexity of the world and on the infinite levels on which you can analyze the world).
Long story short, my claim is that the AI revolution will happen when the AI agent will be able to abstract on a task experience and transfer that to a different task AND abstract away that and transfer that to the set of tasks and so on.
Sort of like the Alpha Zero would next be able to fly helicopters or wash dishes or cook a meal or whatever. Not anytime soon.
Re: The AI Revolution Hasn’t Happened Yet
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
I grew up hearing "we will eventually get computers that can play chess, but go is exponentially more complicated." People wee talking a century. I don't know that cars will happen soon(5-10 years), but I wouldn't want to bet one way or the other past that. We don't need perfection, we just need to equal humans, and humans are actually pretty bad, we are just used to it.
Humans are _amazing_ because they are able to correct the deficiencies of their perception with high level cognition augmented with memory of past experience. Machines can’t do cognition, and they can’t effectively use past experience either, to say nothing of doing a combination of those two things. Current “AI” is basically function approximation and nothing else. And humans do everything they do in a 20W power env…
Most humans don't do cognition nor learning from experiences well either. It is certainly DONE, but we tend to not pay attention to how often we fail. If you check the actual text of an average conversation, people are speaking past each other the majority of the time. We correct, but the vast majority of the time we have no awareness.
We rewrite our memories to fit our mental schemas, to the point where someone describing what they saw is more likely wrong than right, even in dramatic ways . (see a stabbing? Did the man in the suit or the man in rags commit the stabbing?). We suffer change blindness, confirmation bias, prejudice. We rationalize and justify to a ridiculous degree, and in the few cases we become aware of this, that awareness does not allow us to change the behaviors. If someone is wrong, the worst way to get them to change their stance is to show them they are wrong.
We're born helpless and spend a strong percentage of our lives learning how to not die. We transfer information inefficiently and inaccurately, with every generation biologically starting from scratch. We spend 1/3 of our lives unconscious (in addition to that helpless period), and almost 2 decades becoming ready to function independently, at which point most people have only a few years before they dedicate an even larger portion of their life to bootstrapping the next generation.
The Turing test exists because we can't even define what we are describing as obvious (and as I mentioned previously, humans fail the turing test often). Almost everyone that drives has been in some form of a car accident, the overwhelming majority of which were caused by human error. We burn plants so we can inhale the (toxic) vapors, we overestimate rare risks and underestimate inevitable ones, we drink poison for fun, and enjoy it because it reduces our thought processes, we gamble money with the intent of winning more money when it is well known the odds of winning are terrible. We entertain ourselves with habits that target innate thinking fallacies and call it "gamification". We ignore issues that we have confidence will arrive, and then react with panic when they do arrive because we've made no preparations. We declare human life to be so precious we don't want to end the potential, even to the extent of stopping people from preventing that potential, but don't take action to support that life once it is born. We look at a list of flaws like this and shrug it off. We oversimplify, stereotype, and categorize even when errors in those systems are pointed out to us. We don't like being wrong SO MUCH we'd often rather continue being wrong than accept that we were. We eat foods that are unhealthy in unhealthy quantities, and produce and purchase foods that directly encourage those habits. We have short attention spans and short (and inaccurate) memories.
Comparing current AI approaches and human thought is apples and oranges, but to mock AI efforts as function approximation ignores how much function approximation we do. We function, and the diversity of tasks we function at is indeed amazing. The complexity and adaptability of the human species is awe-inspiring. But doing amazing things is still not the same as doing them _well_.
I don't say this to claim humans are terrible. I'm pointing out that we are poor judges of quality and that any system following different fundamental restrictions will have different emergent behaviors. I expect that a car that can drive more safely and more consistently than a human is both a complex problem and much easier than most assume. Driving _well_ is harder, but driving better than a human? Not nearly as hard. What percentage of drivers do you think consider themselves to be "above average"?
Re: The AI Revolution Hasn’t Happened Yet
#106The AI Revolution is happening right now. There's enormous proven potential which is materializing in ever increasing rates. The first generations of hardware accelerators are slowly coming out and they're going to leave everyone astounded. It's a bit like the early days of the internet, it's not always the most practical solution, but it definitely works.
If it were there would be no one denying it. I don't see _that_ though so my conclusion is that, no, there is no revolution yet.
Re: The AI Revolution Hasn’t Happened Yet
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
Such as...? Please don't go BS like "Google is an AI app" etc. I'd expect an app where AI is the indispensable component. You can make a decent search engine/camera/phone/car/microwave without AI.
Google Assistant voice recognition, Google translate, Google Assistant voice generation (wavenet), Google Assistant question answering, Google keyboard word prediction, Google search, YouTube video suggestions, Dropbox ocr, Spotify & Amazon product suggestions, self driving cars (even if they're not perfect), same things as Google Assistant but for alexa & cortana, a huge bunch of new diagnosis tools, etc
Not many of those qualify for "fine enough".
Re: The AI Revolution Hasn’t Happened Yet
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
It has to evolve, not revolve. Like cars did (and they're still -far- from perfect). Our remarkable bodies weren't designed by engineers, they survive now because, earlier, so many didn't. Are we smarter than evolution, because we like to think we are? Time will tell.
Cars (assuming you mean level 5 autonomous ones) are another one of those things which we won’t really be getting for at least 20 more years. 90% of the problem is solved, the remaining 10% are exponentially harder, so no one has a foggiest clue how to solve them, let alone solve economically enough to make the cars viable on the market.
> no one has a foggiest clue how to solve them
Would you care to cite any sources for that? Sounds like something a couch expert would say. Have you talked to every Waymo engineer?
Re: The AI Revolution Hasn’t Happened Yet
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
"they can’t effectively use past experience either" While I'm unsure whether the on board computer of your autonomous car will be able to leverage past experience, I thought it was a forgone conclusion that the telemetry from all the cars on the road will be used to iteratively improve the core model. Which would then be dispersed as an os upgrade, effectively teaching your individual unit from the past experience fr…
But it’s not memory. Currently you just show your neural net a million examples of a thing and it derives a function which, given an example input, minimizes the output error. That’s it. It’s not like “last time I caught a ball in a similar situation I moved like this, so let me start with that and correct based on visuals, audio, proprioception, and cognition”, all within 20 milliseconds, before you even fully under…
> last time I caught a ball in a similar situation I moved like this, so let me start with that and correct based on visuals, audio, proprioception, and cognition
There are types of neural networks (and other algorithms) that work literally like that. Just because a simple deep perceptron does not work like that does not mean no network does.
This one is just off the top of my head, it's quite recent but the memory part is based on old prior work. https://medium.com/applied-data-science/how-to-build-your-ow...
UPD: without even digging deep in the different types of networks, even AlphaGo(/Zero) works like that.
Re: The AI Revolution Hasn’t Happened Yet
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google Assistant voice recognition, Google translate, Google Assistant voice generation (wavenet), Google Assistant question answering, Google keyboard word prediction, Google search, YouTube video suggestions, Dropbox ocr, Spotify & Amazon product suggestions, self driving cars (even if they're not perfect), same things as Google Assistant but for alexa & cortana, a huge bunch of new diagnosis tools, etc
Not many of those qualify for "fine enough".
[deleted]