Noam Chomsky on Where Artificial Intelligence Went Wrong • Hacker News Board

Re: Noam Chomsky on Where Artificial Intelligence Went Wrong

#41

Post by alwaysinshade » Thu, Nov 01, 2012, 11:07 PM UTC

lsb wrote: post #6

The "right" way is to take endless numbers of videotapes of what's happening outside the video, and feed them into the biggest and fastest computer, gigabytes of data, and do complex statistical analysis -- you know, Bayesian this and that -- and you'll get some kind of prediction about what's gonna happen outside the window next. In fact, you get a much better prediction than the physics department will ever give. W…

> If you use simple models, you can only get simple insights

Economics also play a large part in how information is parsed. The advancement of AI outside of academia is largely dependent on what it's being used for and how it's being used. Where great strides are being made is in search because it can be monetised and the computational power required is commensurate with the number of users/frequency of use and ROI. A complex model that can provide better insights but limits the number of concurrent users isn't as useful in a commercial sense.

Re: Noam Chomsky on Where Artificial Intelligence Went Wrong

#42

Post by Cacti » Thu, Nov 01, 2012, 11:11 PM UTC

confluence wrote: post #40

Noam Chomsky irritates me here's why - he's vague, so astonishingly vague that he can hide his uselessness within it. > Chomsky derided researchers in machine learning who use purely statistical methods to produce behavior that mimics something in the world, but who don’t try to understand the meaning of that behavior. Chomsky compared such researchers to scientists who might study the dance made by a bee returning t…

In which way is he vague? He basically reinvented a Turing Machine with human language and brought linguistics around to the idea that, yes, language isn't something that's vaguely "out there" tabula-rasa-style, it's built into our genetics at a very fundamental level. Fundamental enough that he tied linguistics DIRECTLY to math and from there to programming. The Chomsky Heirarchy is no joke.

Your link relating to statistical models is only a tiny, tiny part of Chomsky's fundamental arguments and even then is debatable.

Re: Noam Chomsky on Where Artificial Intelligence Went Wrong

#43

Post by Cacti » Thu, Nov 01, 2012, 11:12 PM UTC

iandanforth wrote: post #10

Chomsky is right up there with Minsky in being part of the problem. His ideas about language being part of the genome are fanciful nonsense. Skinner produce reams of reproducible empirical observations of behavior which are, today, critical to the evaluation of the performance of AIs. Chomsky has produced interesting theories, but mostly derailed linguistics on the basis of the argument 'language is complicated, some…

"His ideas about language being part of the genome are fanciful nonsense."

Oh, so, linguistics is just magic then?

Re: Noam Chomsky on Where Artificial Intelligence Went Wrong

#44

Post by Cacti » Thu, Nov 01, 2012, 11:14 PM UTC

gavanwoolery wrote: post #39

While I respect (some of Chomsky's work) it is amazing to me that he thinks language is something more than mathematics/statistics. Language is math, it is basically an advanced form of discreet mathematics. We can reproduce virtually anything on a computer, and it is no more "shallow" than artificial light from a lightbulb is "artificial." There is no magic going on, we are biological computers, walking number crunc…

I completely agree. The fact that math = language, and that it's built into our DNA, is astounding. And from there that the Halting Problem is basically tied into our DNA, that is, how we think, how our brains work, our ability to conceive ideas, is just mind-blowing. What Chomsky has done in his academic career in on par with the greatest scientists in our history.

Re: Noam Chomsky on Where Artificial Intelligence Went Wrong

#45

Post by confluence » Thu, Nov 01, 2012, 11:18 PM UTC

Cacti wrote: post #42

confluence wrote: post #40

Noam Chomsky irritates me here's why - he's vague, so astonishingly vague that he can hide his uselessness within it. > Chomsky derided researchers in machine learning who use purely statistical methods to produce behavior that mimics something in the world, but who don’t try to understand the meaning of that behavior. Chomsky compared such researchers to scientists who might study the dance made by a bee returning t…

In which way is he vague? He basically reinvented a Turing Machine with human language and brought linguistics around to the idea that, yes, language isn't something that's vaguely "out there" tabula-rasa-style, it's built into our genetics at a very fundamental level. Fundamental enough that he tied linguistics DIRECTLY to math and from there to programming. The Chomsky Heirarchy is no joke. Your link relating to st…

> it's built into our genetics at a very fundamental level.

I'm sorry - but when did Chomsky get a degree in biology or neuroscience.

Re: Noam Chomsky on Where Artificial Intelligence Went Wrong

#46

Post by iandanforth » Thu, Nov 01, 2012, 11:20 PM UTC

calibraxis wrote: post #37

iandanforth wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Language is a set of behaviors Behavior for humans and other animals requires a brain and body (almost always) The organisation, growth, and function of the brain and body are influenced by genetics. So we can say first and formost that language is influenced by genetics. Having a tongue, vocal chords, hands, ears. These all help to acquire language. So now the question is to what degree does genetics influence langu…

If I understand your point correctly, Chomsky does explain this, even in the article. Like with his discussion of "linear order".

I'm surprised he brought that up, it's a weird point. Because a different part of the brain processes the constructed language it's no longer language? It's also untrue. We construct language patterns, poetry for example, where the positional number of a word or a syllable changes its meaning.

That said his point about the brain being wired to take the less computationally intensive route is a very important insight which I think extends beyond genetics and throughout the evolution of all biological processes.

Re: Noam Chomsky on Where Artificial Intelligence Went Wrong

#47

Post by Retric » Thu, Nov 01, 2012, 11:22 PM UTC

mjn wrote: post #18

iandanforth wrote: post #10

Chomsky is right up there with Minsky in being part of the problem. His ideas about language being part of the genome are fanciful nonsense. Skinner produce reams of reproducible empirical observations of behavior which are, today, critical to the evaluation of the performance of AIs. Chomsky has produced interesting theories, but mostly derailed linguistics on the basis of the argument 'language is complicated, some…

> His contributions to science are negligible if not entirely detrimental. I'm not a linguistics expert, but from my vantage point as a computer scientist, it would be hard to conclude that. Chomsky essentially founded the field of formal language theory, and was the first to propose many widely-used constructs, such as the context-free grammar. They may or may not explain how English works, but pretty much everythin…

Language theory predates Chomsky. The earliest known activities in descriptive linguistics have been attributed to Panini around 500 BCE, with his analysis of Sanskrit in Ashtadhyayi.[6] So, while Chomsky is famous his actual contributions are far less than you might suppose.

Re: Noam Chomsky on Where Artificial Intelligence Went Wrong

#48

Post by reso » Thu, Nov 01, 2012, 11:23 PM UTC

confluence wrote: post #45

Cacti wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In which way is he vague? He basically reinvented a Turing Machine with human language and brought linguistics around to the idea that, yes, language isn't something that's vaguely "out there" tabula-rasa-style, it's built into our genetics at a very fundamental level. Fundamental enough that he tied linguistics DIRECTLY to math and from there to programming. The Chomsky Heirarchy is no joke. Your link relating to st…

> it's built into our genetics at a very fundamental level. I'm sorry - but when did Chomsky get a degree in biology or neuroscience.

Chomsky's work has been cited by many papers in both fields.

Re: Noam Chomsky on Where Artificial Intelligence Went Wrong

#49

Post by reso » Thu, Nov 01, 2012, 11:26 PM UTC

So much hate in this thread for one of men who laid the foundations of Computer Science. We may disagree with his ideas now, and possibly his theories are out of date, but the magnitude of his contribution to linguistics, and by extension, neurology, psychology, and computer science, puts him in the very highest rank of scientists.

Re: Noam Chomsky on Where Artificial Intelligence Went Wrong

#50

Post by MatthewPhillips » Thu, Nov 01, 2012, 11:33 PM UTC

iandanforth wrote: post #10

Chomsky is right up there with Minsky in being part of the problem. His ideas about language being part of the genome are fanciful nonsense. Skinner produce reams of reproducible empirical observations of behavior which are, today, critical to the evaluation of the performance of AIs. Chomsky has produced interesting theories, but mostly derailed linguistics on the basis of the argument 'language is complicated, some…

I hope you're kidding about his contributions to political debate. Chomsky has the maximalist attitude that represents everything that is wrong with political debate today. His hatred of U.S. foreign policy is so extreme that he will defend absolutely everyone the U.S. opposes which means occasionally defending tyrants and denying genocide.