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

AI Is No Match for the Quirks of Human Intelligence

thereader.mitpress.mit.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 86 posts

Re: AI Is No Match for the Quirks of Human Intelligence

#21

Post by gopalv »

pjmorris wrote: post #11
leesec wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds like a commercial acceptance bet rather than a technology one but yeah I would take the same bet. But I'd bet by 2031 driving a car will not be the peak of AI.

I take commercial acceptance as a proxy for the acceptance and practicality of artificial intelligence at the 'everyday' task of driving. I would take the absence of commercial acceptance as evidence that artificial intelligence is not up to the 'everyday' task of driving.

> I would take the absence of commercial acceptance as evidence that artificial intelligence is not up to the 'everyday' task of driving.

The most interesting thing Tesla is doing to make "acceptable" FSD possible is to open an insurance company.

So commercial acceptance is proxy for capability, but it is not immune to regulatory moat building (or alternatively, go the other way - like, force 80+ year olds to drive enhanced cars).

There's some ways around it, but that problem isn't a technology one.

Re: AI Is No Match for the Quirks of Human Intelligence

#22

Post by sdenton4 »

drcode wrote: post #3

It's odd to take an anecdote about what a person did thousands of years ago (assuming Archimedes actually existed, I suppose we have decent evidence) and use that as the gold standard for how the human mind functions.

Chess and Go were beaten, and the AI goalpost had to move /somewhere/...

Re: AI Is No Match for the Quirks of Human Intelligence

#24

Post by potatoman22 »

thedudeabides5 wrote: post #17
leroman wrote: post #15

If you were to postfix any “AI” criticism with “yet”, it would make the point being made more legitimate.. We don’t know what we don’t know..

and while we will certain learn more later , we may never learn it all https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_...

I somewhat understand how applies to math, but is it generalizable to life?

Re: AI Is No Match for the Quirks of Human Intelligence

#25

Post by esalman »

paul7986 wrote: post #7

If true then robot cars are scarier then I've thought ... AI is going to be able to process the right scenario to avoid a deadly crash within the first decade or more of market adoption or the programmers are going to learn and ship bug fixes for each person their prior code killed? *I'm always downvoted for this thought but is this not the true way forward with robot cars? Those who downvote me think the first batch…

Well, autonomous cars are able to detect obstacles on an narrow lane. That is nowhere near general intelligence.

Re: AI Is No Match for the Quirks of Human Intelligence

#26

Post by cowanon22 »

leesec wrote: post #4

There is nothing special about human intelligence. We will have smarter computers in our life time and I'm willing to place bets.

We don't know yet if there is anything special about human intelligence, or what the limitations of general intelligence might be. Are animal and plants a slower form of the same intelligence, or is there something qualitatively different? Can rocks and liquids be considered intelligent since it led to life, which eventually led to us?

Current AI/ML does not appear to have any properties of "life intelligence" - for example you can put an animal or even plant into an unfamiliar situation and it will often figure out a way to survive. AI/ML in the evaluation phase is often pretty dumb, and needs new training if anything changes. Reinforcement learning is probably the closest but still seem pretty limited.

I don't think the current approaches will lead to general intelligence. However, I do suspect that when the right theoretical breakthrough is made AI will rapidly become superhuman and humans will not be in control of what it does - it will simply iterate too quickly for us to compete in any way intellectually.

Re: AI Is No Match for the Quirks of Human Intelligence

#27

Post by commandlinefan »

leesec wrote: post #4

There is nothing special about human intelligence. We will have smarter computers in our life time and I'm willing to place bets.

In 1979 Douglas Hofstatder wrote Godel, Escher and Bach in which he predicted that computers would eventually be able to beat humans in chess, but that those computers would say, "I'm bored of chess now, I want to talk about poetry." The history of AI has been the hard work of really describing a problem like playing chess or reading letters or recommending songs and then applying AI techniques to it, but I don't think anybody's ever trying to work on a computer that discovers new problems to solve.

Re: AI Is No Match for the Quirks of Human Intelligence

#29

Post by CaptArmchair »

drcode wrote: post #3

It's odd to take an anecdote about what a person did thousands of years ago (assuming Archimedes actually existed, I suppose we have decent evidence) and use that as the gold standard for how the human mind functions.

First, there's plenty established historical evidence that supports Archimedes existence. I'm not sure why you doubt this.

Second, the article uses the story of Archimedes Principle as one of several examples to illustrate in an digestible manner what an "Insight problem" is, how it differs from a "Path problem", and how that difference impedes AI from matching human intelligence. At no point did the author presume that Archimedes "Eureka!" moment is a "gold standard" by which to compare the performative functioning of modern day, digital based AI.

Third, consider that this blogpost / essay is target a wider audience beyond the field of artificial intelligence. As the impressum in the footer of the site reads:

> Illuminating the bold ideas and voices that make up the MIT Press's expansive catalog. We publish thought-provoking excerpts, interviews, and original essays written for a general reader but backed by academic rigor.

Re: AI Is No Match for the Quirks of Human Intelligence

#30

Post by tuyiown »

leesec wrote: post #4

There is nothing special about human intelligence. We will have smarter computers in our life time and I'm willing to place bets.

I would not place bet on the replication of the result of a billions years of iterations and refinement, whatever under-optimized was the process. (who knows, it even might be the most efficient)
Post reply on HN