Artificial Intelligence 2020 - is there progress? - page 42
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
I get it. It's complicated. It's often hard for a person to make sense of themselves. How can one create a mind?
So, in order to get a correct logical conclusion, you have to add ALL the details to every fact?
Not all, but all the necessary ones, of which there are enough.
Not all, but all the necessary ones, of which there are enough.
Not all, but all necessary, which is enough.
necessary enough and necessary not enough from logic))) Dalet sophistry)
The mathematical engine is unable to distinguish important/input properties of a category of objects from unimportant particularities without human experience, and therefore cannot properly generalise data by filling the category with abstractions rather than details (tails in the mammalian niche).
The development of neural networks and MO is following the likeness of found rules algorithms and whatever else living organisms do. This has always amazed me. instead of making up a similarity. But it works for some reason in certain tasks. The transition of quantity into quality. But it's not about brain and intelligence))) It's at the cellular level for now.
The development of neural networks and MO is following the similarity of the found rules of algorithms and whatever else living organisms. This has always amazed me. instead of inventing to make a similarity. But it works for some reason in certain tasks. The transition of quantity into quality. But it's not about brain and intelligence))) It's at the cellular level for now.
Earlier in the thread I said that neural networks are not enough to create an adequately thinking AI (they are enough for primitive recognition, primitive prediction and primitive classification).
Thinking is a process of another mechanism that we know little about. Logic is invariably present in thinking, but works in multiple ways - empirical experience is often at odds with logic and they "fight". Experience filters out unconcerned logical conclusions, selecting the right ones from a stream of straightforward, logically based nonsense.
All in all - the field for research is vast.
Earlier in the thread I said that neural networks are not enough to create an adequately thinking AI (they are enough for primitive recognition, primitive prediction and primitive classification).
Thinking is a process of another mechanism that we know little about. Logic is invariably present in thinking, but works in multiple ways - empirical experience is often at odds with logic and they "fight". Experience filters out unconcerned logical conclusions, selecting the right ones from a stream of straightforward, logically based nonsense.
All in all - the field for research is enormous.
That is why talk and laws about AI ethics are premature and are all but a means of increasing demand and making money)
This is why talk and laws about AI ethics are premature and are all just a means of increasing demand and making money).
The lab is MetaTrader5 with the MQL5 language. All the tools you need are there.
You will not be able to find experienced programmers and investors who will spend their time and money on any research of your father.
So your father (or you) will have to master MQL5 to prove something to himself and/or the world. Or at least in order to make a real practical first step to attract the same investors and experienced programmers.
Your words imply a conclusion that your father has a very superficial notion of AI. I really wish I were wrong.
You have a beautiful, legalistic style of speech. )))