[deleted]
Re:Human-Level AI Is Harder Than It Seemed in 1955 – John Mc...
by coldtea on Wednesday January 28, 2015 @09:52PM
(#8964054)
>I think the only concrete difference between "seemingly intelligent" and "intelligent" is wether an entity evolves over time and gets smarter.
Even a naive chess engine being fed games can do that. That's not exactly intelligence.
Re:Human-Level AI Is Harder Than It Seemed in 1955 – John Mc...
by harperlee on Thursday January 29, 2015 @12:43AM
(#8964538)
Could you please elaborate on why do you believe it is a dead end? I'm learning about symbolic logic and I would love to have some pointers on the limitation of the approach... From what I've read to date, it's just too expensive to have a proper rule set, but I haven't found a good discussion on the limitations of the approach!
Thus, should we instead be building black-box systems that behave seemingly intelligently without understanding why they behave intelligently? I.e. neural networks, deep learning? Is this a good investment? It seems so, at least in the short term. But what about the long term? I don't know the answer.
Having said that, I've been working for some time on non-monotonic reasoning and related subjects, which are typical symbolic logic approaches to AI, and I believe that what I am doing, while intellectually very worthwhile, is a dead end in the context of AI. I'm sometimes surprised at how easily we get money to get to work on this stuff. So I agree with the point that lack of funding is not the problem.