Technology

34912 readers

151 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.

Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.

Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

MinutePhrase@lemmy.ml

Do you think the turing test allows for any other conclusion than "it's a relatively good AI"? (feddit.de)

submitted 2 years ago by sexy_peach@feddit.de to c/technology@lemmy.ml

29 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I don't really think so. I am not really sure why, but my gut feeling is that being good at impersonating a human being in text conversation doesn't mean you're closer to creating a real AI.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] vitaminka@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

i see 🤔

i'm still not totally convinced that there's a fundamental division/difference between the criteria that constitute a brain/consciousness (many of them you mentioned) and just artifacts of learning algorithms at a scale we can't model/execute on a computer

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago

I don't think there's anything magical about consciousness that can't be modelled and executed on a computer. I'm just saying that current approaches to AI are inherently limited because they're not based on symbolic logic.

A neural network gets tuned based on some input data, and it has no understanding what that data represents. It's just a bunch of numbers without any context. All it can do is to say that a particular numeric input matches one of the inputs its been trained on previously within a certain confidence interval.

On the other hand, the neural network in the brain evolved to represent the physical environment, and that's the shared context we have when we interact with one another. Our language relies on a lot of shared context based on this.

And I think that in order to make AI that has human style intelligence we have to train it within the context of a physical environment that it learns to interact with to create this share context that we can relate to.