I think using chess and go as analogies rather than misses the point. They’re not trying to get a system to automate playing a game, not really.
They are trying to get it to make intelligent decisions about complex real-world problems, Go has a very simple set of rules that are always true, never change, and are always in play. None of the complexities of real life are replicated. So it’s ability to play Go or Chess or even a more complicated game like a first person shooter are not demonstrations of its ability in the domains in which AI is being advertised for.
I think a far better test of whether a system is actually useful is what it does if it is given no input at all. Does it just sit there forever or does it actually start doing things and currently every single AI system in existence would just stay idle in that scenario.
demonstrations of its ability in the domains in which AI is being advertised for.
I am absolutely not claiming that AI is useful “in the domains in which it’s being advertised for.” I’m saying that it’s not entirely useless. Despite being overhyped, there are a handful of useful applications.
I think a far better test of whether a system is actually useful is what it does if it is given no input at all.
What? That’s not true at all. My toaster doesn’t go out and do things on its own initiative but it’s still very useful for making toast when I tell it to.
Maybe instead of usefulness, you mean like consciousness or actual intelligence? But that’s pure hype and bullshit. Anyone claiming that a word generator is conscious is either trying to scam you or is being scammed.
Just because someone says (as they do), “This oil will allow you to unlock the hidden power of the 90% of your brain you don’t use, thanks to our new quantum formula, now only $300 a bottle” that doesn’t mean that quantum mechanics isn’t also a real thing that has actual applications. Machine learning is the same way. It attracts all the snake oil salesmen who spout complete and utter bullshit about it, but it is a real technology that has legitimate uses despite all that.
I think using chess and go as analogies rather than misses the point. They’re not trying to get a system to automate playing a game, not really.
They are trying to get it to make intelligent decisions about complex real-world problems, Go has a very simple set of rules that are always true, never change, and are always in play. None of the complexities of real life are replicated. So it’s ability to play Go or Chess or even a more complicated game like a first person shooter are not demonstrations of its ability in the domains in which AI is being advertised for.
I think a far better test of whether a system is actually useful is what it does if it is given no input at all. Does it just sit there forever or does it actually start doing things and currently every single AI system in existence would just stay idle in that scenario.
I am absolutely not claiming that AI is useful “in the domains in which it’s being advertised for.” I’m saying that it’s not entirely useless. Despite being overhyped, there are a handful of useful applications.
What? That’s not true at all. My toaster doesn’t go out and do things on its own initiative but it’s still very useful for making toast when I tell it to.
Maybe instead of usefulness, you mean like consciousness or actual intelligence? But that’s pure hype and bullshit. Anyone claiming that a word generator is conscious is either trying to scam you or is being scammed.
Just because someone says (as they do), “This oil will allow you to unlock the hidden power of the 90% of your brain you don’t use, thanks to our new quantum formula, now only $300 a bottle” that doesn’t mean that quantum mechanics isn’t also a real thing that has actual applications. Machine learning is the same way. It attracts all the snake oil salesmen who spout complete and utter bullshit about it, but it is a real technology that has legitimate uses despite all that.