Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AI

blog.samaltman.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 317 posts

Re: AI

#2

Post by elwell »

10 points in 10 minutes. If multiple accounts weren't used, that must be a ready-worthy article.

Re: AI

#3

Post by the_watcher »

elwell wrote: post #2

10 points in 10 minutes. If multiple accounts weren't used, that must be a ready-worthy article.

Also, by Sam Altman. Assuming several people saw it in their RSS readers and submitted it after reading.

Re: AI

#4

Post by Zikes »

elwell wrote: post #2

10 points in 10 minutes. If multiple accounts weren't used, that must be a ready-worthy article.

   (samaltman.com)
Most likely assumed read-worthy based on the author.

Re: AI

#7

Post by elwell »

Zikes wrote: post #4
elwell wrote: post #2

10 points in 10 minutes. If multiple accounts weren't used, that must be a ready-worthy article.

(samaltman.com) Most likely assumed read-worthy based on the author.

Fair enough, but is the author's name alone sufficient? Surely the article wasn't fully read by every upvoter.

Re: AI

#8

Post by yogo »

Interesting post. The way I look at it is from the perspective of a human baby. How do they become intelligent? They have the "sensors" to detect features and will be able to recognize their parents. A lot of things are then learned, like touching a hot stove and from getting a formal education. For a machine to be artificially intelligent it would have to learn from its environment but also take formal instruction. That seems like a lot of ground to cover and this is what makes it unrealistic (for now).

You can have a machine read every book in existence but how long will it take for it to understand in the same way a human reading a lot of books would need to understand it somehow.

Re: AI

#10

Post by elwell »

Critically speaking, this article doesn't add anything. I don't know why I read it. Can anyone explain why they upvoted?
Post reply on HN