> Look at the history - it's actually hard to find something that is not biased - false, biased believes are spread throughout the timeline of human kind. Given enough time, our knowledge gets closer towards truth
How do you think you know any of that?
Parents, family, teachers, community... ???
However, even on an individual level, haven't you ever had a new idea that didn't come from another person but just your own observation and contemplation?
It would be a copout. Instead of actually tackling AI's problem of common sense, claim that maybe layers of logistic regression and matrix factorization is all there is, we are its equal, just a few layers up in abstraction and evolution. Does one really stem and count tokens to decide if a movie review is negative sentiment? Or does one empathize with its writer and build a complete model inside your head?
The horse would be the AI researcher claiming reasoning and understanding from an activation vector trained on word co-occurence on Wikipedia, and the farmer giving clues, is the heated community and industry, mistaking impressive dataset performance for a solution for a problem they're starting to forget.
first problem: find the roots x^2 + 2x + 1
second try: find the roots of 4x^2 - 2x + 4
Or something like that.
e.g. highschool mathematics
But some people - communities of people - pored over this stuff for centuries to work it out and try to find flaws (and found them). You could have an AI that tries to find flaws - provided you have an actually correct statement of the problem.
That's the classic scifi problem with robots: they do what you tell them to.
It comes across as a warning that we don't really have any solid understanding of what we're doing when we create new and powerful entities, and that pride cometh before the fall.
Plus, any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology :P
Human knowledge was created by humans. We might repeat it blindly too, but somebody had to create it first. That is fundamentally different from what Hans did.
The human mind has many faculties, and the brain has correspondingly many functionally different elements. Plus years of brute force learning.
Compared to GPT2, AlphaZero and whatever we are waay more complex and had a lot more training done.
Probably the super secret sauce is in the hyperparameters that determine how to cobble all those functional components together to get something more than the simple sum of them. (But they are also learned and brute forced through evolution.)
AI needs better brains. (So R&D can proceed faster. We can test new ideas cheaper, we can optimize algorithms, so they'll learn and perform better.)