Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
jheartney:
--- Quote from: mustang6172 on 09 Jun 2016, 20:29 ---
--- Quote from: jheartney on 09 Jun 2016, 19:55 ---
--- Quote from: mustang6172 on 09 Jun 2016, 19:44 ---New comic.
I think Bubbles is describing any non-sentient computer (and ignoring that empathy is a learned response.)
--- End quote ---
I don't think so. No non-sentient computer I have ever dealt with appeared to be at all intelligent. Quite the contrary.
--- End quote ---
They seem pretty smart when they beat me at board games.
--- End quote ---
That's not general intelligence; that's a set of algorithms meant to work in a defined decision space. Somewhat general intelligence would be if you could tell it the rules of a new game it had never played before, and if it could then devise a strategy that would beat you. Real general intelligence would be if, when it played Poker with you, it could read your body language and tell if you were bluffing.
brasca:
So Bubbles managed to make Faye uncomfortable. She'll have to remember to put the subject matter of this conversation in the save folder.
Is it cold in here?:
Jeph said once that human employment still exists because a lot of AIs become forklifts and toasters, and many others just don't want to work for a living.
BenRG:
This is basically a prank; Bubbles is just saying this to freak out Faye. So, we now know that she is the sort of person who enjoys scaring kids with elaborate scary campfire stories!
Scarblac:
--- Quote from: jheartney on 09 Jun 2016, 20:57 ---That's not general intelligence; that's a set of algorithms meant to work in a defined decision space. Somewhat general intelligence would be if you could tell it the rules of a new game it had never played before, and if it could then devise a strategy that would beat you.
--- End quote ---
Marvin Minsky pointed out that people in the 60s said that computers would never beat humans at chess, because that requires intelligence and computers aren't capable of intelligent thought. When they eventually did, it was claimed that playing chess wasn't a test of real intelligence because computers could do it.
Learning to play a game from just the rules is an active area of research called General Game Playing. When (If) it happens that the programs they develop become good enough to learn chess just from its rules and then beat the best humans (something absolutely no human can do), it will then seem to be "a set of algorithms meant to work in a defined decision space". The exact same is true for your example of trying to figure out whether someone is bluffing from camera images.
General artificial intelligence is the set of intelligence-related problems we haven't solved with computers yet.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version