"AI is 'Machine Learning' for journalists" Unfortunately I can't recall where I first heard this great quip.
"'Machine Learning' is Linear Algebra for marketers"
You read it here first.
Stop Calling Everything AI, Machine-Learning Pioneer Says
91–100 of 123 posts
Re: Stop Calling Everything AI, Machine-Learning Pioneer Says
#92I'm in the submarine AI camp[1]. I'd rather build tools that kinda help humans do thinking, rather than thinking machines. Like how submarines help humans swim but who cares if they are actually swimming. 1. "The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than the question of whether a submarine can swim." - Edsger Dijkstra
> "The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than the question of whether a submarine can swim." - Edsger Dijkstra
Something about that quote always bothers me. I'm not sure what, but if I were to try to express the same fundamental idea, I would probably phrase it as "whether a bicycle can walk".
Re: Stop Calling Everything AI, Machine-Learning Pioneer Says
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
The human mind is so flawed I am not sure its a good model to build thinking machines.
no one has a good model of a human mind
Depends on what you mean by good, and what level of detail you expect. People certainly have developed accurate enough models to be able to exploit biases and predict & influence patterns of behavior in others.
Re: Stop Calling Everything AI, Machine-Learning Pioneer Says
#94I'm in the submarine AI camp[1]. I'd rather build tools that kinda help humans do thinking, rather than thinking machines. Like how submarines help humans swim but who cares if they are actually swimming. 1. "The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than the question of whether a submarine can swim." - Edsger Dijkstra
That's called Augmented Intelligence, a well-trod field and a better ROI than aspects of autonomous and human-replacement intelligence.
Re: Stop Calling Everything AI, Machine-Learning Pioneer Says
#95What is the marketing team going to do without machine learning, artificial intelligent, blockchain driven cloud based PAAS?
Clearly, quantum blockchain driven cloud based PaaS.
Please let me know when this is ready for prime time - I'm really interested in bringing an Intelligent Quantum (IQ) Blockchain driven cloud based PaaS security platform to market. The secret of IQ technology, is that, while the others have "artificial" intelligence, there is nothing fake about ours.
I believe we could realize great value with a blue ocean strategy like that.
Re: Stop Calling Everything AI, Machine-Learning Pioneer Says
#96I'm in the submarine AI camp[1]. I'd rather build tools that kinda help humans do thinking, rather than thinking machines. Like how submarines help humans swim but who cares if they are actually swimming. 1. "The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than the question of whether a submarine can swim." - Edsger Dijkstra
> "The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than the question of whether a submarine can swim." - Edsger Dijkstra Something about that quote always bothers me. I'm not sure what, but if I were to try to express the same fundamental idea, I would probably phrase it as "whether a bicycle can walk".
I think you are missing the point.
A submarine "swims" in the same way an airplane "flies."
But for some reason, in English anyway, we seem to define "swim" such that, by definition, only an animal can do it. Or at least, it must behave similarly to a swimming animal...such as by flapping fins and the like.
Meanwhile we don't think an airplane doesn't fly simply because it doesn't flap its wings.
The point is that semantics tells you very little about reality. And debating semantics is not particularly interesting, or at least a good way of missing the point.
Walking bicycles? Well, ok. That's much more of a stretch, partly because of the fact that there is a human much more directly involved in the propulsion of a bicycle compared to things with actual engines (airplanes and submarines)
Re: Stop Calling Everything AI, Machine-Learning Pioneer Says
#97I'm in the submarine AI camp[1]. I'd rather build tools that kinda help humans do thinking, rather than thinking machines. Like how submarines help humans swim but who cares if they are actually swimming. 1. "The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than the question of whether a submarine can swim." - Edsger Dijkstra
> 1. "The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than the question of whether a submarine can swim." - Edsger Dijkstra Not sure what he meant by that, it doesn't really make sense to me: thinking yields information and deductions that can be very useful, while swimming by itself accomplishes nothing useful. Actually, I just can't make any sense of the sentence, because while I have a general…
His point was that we might say "submarines aren't actually swimming" while saying "of course airplanes actually fly."
What's the difference? The only difference is semantic, we seem to have defined "swimming" to be arbitrarily restrictive (as in, only applying to animals), while we haven't done so for flying.
Meanwhile, we can say a magnet is attracted to metal, and no one says "wait, it can't ACTUALLY be attracted to it, since that takes a brain and sentience and preferences."
And then, most of us don't bat an eye if someone says "my computer thinks the network is down" or "my phone doesn't recognize my face" or even "the heater blowing on the thermostat is making it think it is hotter than it is." It's not helpful to interject with, "well, thermostats don't really think."
The point is, these are arbitrary choices of how we define words (which may vary in different languages), and they aren't saying meaningful things about reality.
Re: Stop Calling Everything AI, Machine-Learning Pioneer Says
#98The term Artificial Intelligence implicitly makes people design systems that don’t involve people—because if people have an information processing role, then it seems like the system isn’t artificial yet, and therefore unfinished. That’s rather unhealthy
> The term Artificial Intelligence implicitly makes people design systems that don’t involve people—because if people have an information processing role, then it seems like the system isn’t artificial yet, and therefore unfinished. That’s rather unhealthy
Well put, but doesn't go quite far enough. Because those systems do still involve people, it only as objects to be acted upon, rather than actors with agency. Which isn't just unhealthy, it is downright pathological (and often socio- or psycho-pathic).
We've seen this sort of creeping bias before, with terms such as "Content Management System" displacing more human centric terms such as reading, writing (or even authoring), sharing, and publishing. "Content" is just an amorphous mass that is only produced in order to be "managed", poured into various containers, distributed, and delivered in order to be consumed.
Re: Stop Calling Everything AI, Machine-Learning Pioneer Says
#99I'm in the submarine AI camp[1]. I'd rather build tools that kinda help humans do thinking, rather than thinking machines. Like how submarines help humans swim but who cares if they are actually swimming. 1. "The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than the question of whether a submarine can swim." - Edsger Dijkstra
> "The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than the question of whether a submarine can swim." - Edsger Dijkstra Something about that quote always bothers me. I'm not sure what, but if I were to try to express the same fundamental idea, I would probably phrase it as "whether a bicycle can walk".
You can read Edsger's handwritten quote in the third paragraph at page EWD898-2.
Re: Stop Calling Everything AI, Machine-Learning Pioneer Says
#100Interestingly as soon as a system works or we understand it's principles we stop using the term "artificial intelligence". It becomes image recognition, autonomous cars, or face detection. We mostly talk about artificial intelligence when we dont really know or understand what we are talking about :-)
Exactly, the same happens with the word "technology". Are scissors technology? They used to be but now they are comparatively too well understood and simple. Just like with AI, we label things technology that are on the forefront and not yet well understood and ironed out.
> Are scissors technology?
To an anthropologist or archeologist scissors are most definitely a technology. As are basket weaving, flint-knapped tools, speech and writing, etc.