Re:"We'll call it AI to sell it, Machine Learning to Build it"
by ang_cire on Friday October 13, 2023 @12:06PM
(#37872120)
Yes, the people selling the hammer want you to believe it's a sonic screwdriver. What else is new? You sort of prove my point when your evidence of who is making those claims are the people with a vested interest, not the actual scientists and non-equity developers who do the actual coding.
"But a company said the tech in their space might be ground-breaking earth-shattering life-changing stuff any minute now! What, you think people would just go on the internet and lie!?"
Re:"We'll call it AI to sell it, Machine Learning to Build it"
by ben_w on Friday October 13, 2023 @03:55PM
(#37874858)
"No Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge."
"But my uncle Angus is a Scotsman and he puts sugar on his porridge."
"But no true Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge."
Re:"We'll call it AI to sell it, Machine Learning to Build it"
by ang_cire on Tuesday October 17, 2023 @10:17PM
(#37924164)
I haven't set up a No True Scotsman proposition, I made a very clear and straightforward assertion, that I've challenged others to disprove.
Show me one scientific paper on Machine Learning that suggests it's similar in mechanism to the human brain's method of learning.
It's not a lack of logical or rhetorical means to disprove that's stopping you (i.e. I'm not moving any goalposts), it's the lack of evidence existing, and that's not a No True Scotsman fallacy, it's just the thing legitimately not existing.
Apart from the most famous AI developer group since near the beginning of this year, on the back of releasing an AI that's upset a lot of teachers and interview-question writers because it can pass so many of their existing quizzes without the student/candidate needing to understand anything.
I suppose you could argue that they are only saying "AGI could happen soon or far in the future" rather than "it will definitely be soon"…