Artificial Intelligence 2020 - is there progress? - page 14
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
It is purely a matter of preference. It is possible to build both schizophrenia or schizophasia into the intellect and data that will rule them out. And it is possible to initially define the boundaries and principles of the views. In this case the AI will be able to communicate with the respondent concretely in his/her way. With a fool as a fool, with a scientist as a scientist.
I completely agree, that is how various assistants behave - they are given a psychological profile
But we expect AI to do more than just talk, don't we? - We need a system that makes decisions based on its previous experience, don't we?
But we expect AI to do more than just talk, don't we? - We need a system that makes decisions based on its previous experience, don't we?
Again, I can't find any specifics about complexity. What is the difficulty? What prevents it?
Again, I don't find any specifics about the difficulty. What is the difficulty? What's preventing it?
Probably just not trusting the AI to make complex decisions.
In the game industry bots can make bad decisions on the next move, this adds humanity and realism ;)
Give an example, please. Usually the meaning form (in my experience) comes from a certain context. There are guys like psychoneticists. They have taken it apart. And in their experience it comes out that initially there is some background from which figures (specific units of meaning) are formed. You just approach it from the wrong side, and that's why potential difficulties emerge that may not even arise in practice.
Recently, there was a discussion on a literary topic in the humour thread. I suggested that the essence of the novels I read should be formulated in a few sentences and, for example, I condensed the content of Dostoevsky's classic work 'The Idiot' to a sentence 'a weak-minded man used and abused in his society' (not the best formulation of the essence, but still). One could say that I unknowingly created a "query" for the AI, which, in reverse order, would have to find all similar classic novels based on this meaning alone, but with a variety of linguistic forms of query.
Complexity does arise. But only at the linguistic level. If you ask the AI not a verbal question, but a task based on the semantic form of what you mean, it may find many more options. Including ones that would make you poop your pants at the subtlety of the humour.
Although in principle, take a dialogue between people. When you do not understand something or do not fully understand what is going on? A sensible person suggests, clarifies, paraphrases, gives an analogy, asks again if he/she understood correctly? And if you challenge the AI to get to the meaning of the original query and then generate an answer, then the question is solved.
Complexity does arise. But only at the linguistic level. If you ask the AI not a verbal question, but a task based on the semantic form of what you mean, it may find many more options. Including ones that would make you poop your pants at the subtlety of the humour.
Although in principle, take a dialogue between people. When you do not understand something or do not fully understand what is going on? A sensible person suggests, clarifies, paraphrases, gives an analogy, asks again if he/she understood correctly? And if you challenge the AI to get to the meaning of the original query and then generate an answer, then the question is solved.
If linguistics were removed, the task of creating an AI could be greatly simplified. A human must adhere to a rigid, standardised format for the verbal structuring of meaning, but communicating with such an AI would be highly uncomfortable. In essence, it would be an ordinary program working with structured queries.
AI has considerably more capacity in RAM and database space. Hence, it is much easier and simpler for an AI to process information. If you are looking at AI as a small module or script, then of course it is closer to an amoeba. But if you basically consider the potential of AI as a whole, there is far more than human thinking can handle. At least, thinking within the boundaries that are generally accepted.
AI has considerably more capacity in RAM and database space. Hence, it is much easier and simpler for an AI to process information. If you are looking at AI as a small module or script, then of course it is closer to an amoeba. But if you basically consider the potential of AI as a whole, there is far more than human thinking can handle. At least, thinking within the boundaries that are generally accepted.
You are talking about an AI that does not yet exist.
Why do you think it doesn't exist? Just because you don't have it personally?
In practice, anything that is possible (much less difficult to achieve) is developed and improved. And there are perfectly logical reasons for certain areas and possibilities not to be publicly available. Or even perceived as existing.
There are plenty of technologies and developments that suggest that all the complexities that can arise in the social worldview regarding the existence of many things have long since been resolved.
Even if, in principle, something does not yet exist somewhere, to consider it a distant prospect is ridiculous, to say the least. Especially if you can't find the potential difficulties in implementation.
Why do you think it doesn't exist? Just because you don't have it personally?
In practice, anything that is possible (much less difficult to achieve) is developed and improved. And there are perfectly logical reasons for certain areas and possibilities not to be publicly available. Or even perceived as existing.
There are plenty of technologies and developments that suggest that all the complexities that can arise in the social worldview regarding the existence of many things have long since been resolved.
Even if, in principle, something does not yet exist somewhere, to consider it a distant prospect is ridiculous, to say the least. Especially if you can't find potential difficulties in implementation.
it does not exist! but there is simply an indicator - to which you have set the agenda.