Re:AlphaGo Is Not AI
by eli_gottlieb on Monday March 20, 2017 @03:05PM
(#13916771)
>We have no servicable definition of intelligence other than a behaviourist black box embodied by humans.
I believe cognitive scientists have a considerably better idea than that.
Yes they each have a better idea, but the intersection of their proposals is pretty much just that. Why do you think they still make a big fuss over the Turing Test?
Re:AlphaGo Is Not AI
by eli_gottlieb on Monday March 20, 2017 @09:55PM
(#13919206)
I have never heard cognitive scientists make a big fuss over the Turing Test. Who've you been reading/watching?
Good old Doug makes a little fuss here:
https://books.google.no/books?id=qa85DgAAQBAJ&lpg=PT428&ots=...
When I said "make a big fuss" i didn't mean "herald it as the gold standard", but they do go on about it even though they might disagree about what it utlimately signifies.
From the other end, the merits of production AI will be measured against isolated properties pulled out of the intellgence black-box, and since intelligence remains undefined (in a strict ontological sense), debate ensues.