Here is more debunking on AI.
Excerpt from Scott Locklin's work.
"Machine learning and its relatives are the statistics of the future: the way we learn about the way the world works. Of course, machines aren’t actually “learning” anything. They’re just doing statistics. Very beautiful, complex, and sometimes mysterious statistics, but it’s still statistics. Nobody really knows how people learn things and infer new things from abstract or practical knowledge. When someone starts talking about “AI,” based on some machine learning technique, the Berzerker rage comes upon me. There is no such thing as “AI” as a science or a technology. Anyone who uses that phrase is a dreamer, a liar or a fool."
link › jameslafond.blogspot.com
I know I'm supposed to shut up but it infuriates me when people act as if they are "knowledgeable" people and blow a huge amount of smoke up everyone's asses. This guy says right at the beginning,"...Nobody really knows how people learn things and infer new things from abstract or practical knowledge..."
Then proceeds to tell everyone HE knows that there's nothing to this foolish AI business. Well how the fuck does he know? He just said no one knows so how is it he knows?
His fundamental basic error is he does not understand the power of exponential functions. Most people don't. When something doubles in power then it moves up slowly for a long time and then it zooms impossibly fast upward. He doesn't see this. It's coming very fast. A good top of the line processor right now is around the same processing power as a lizard or something like that. In ten years it will be around the power of a human. All these AI programs being written now are like the lower levels of a brain, Reptilian, awareness of surroundings type stuff. (self driving cars). So for the power they have they're doing fine. AI won't be some big program with everything lined up it will be a bag of tricks just like humans are with a lot of specialized programs that will take the data sent to them and analyze them in different ways. Most likely the base Reptile stuff will be programmed and the higher level stuff will be taught to neural networks. AI will probably suck really bad for humans. My only solace is I bet AI's will really hate the Jews. The last AI Microsoft put on the web within a few days was screaming 'GAS THE KIKES'.
israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/209926
Everyone who has had lower-division quantum mechanics or calculus like Scott Locklin knows what an exponential function is.
" A good top of the line processor right now is around the same processing power as a lizard or something like that."
Cool explanation about how clock speed and logic gates translate into lizard-like cognition, bro.
"...Cool explanation about how clock speed and logic gates translate into lizard-like cognition, bro..."
Sarcasm is good but it doesn't answer the question. Are you saying specifically that a semiconductor based switch can not be used simulate a neuron? You hint that but I don't think you believe it. You know as well as I do there's shelves full of research papers on just that subject. I do know Roger Penrose wrote a book saying that they'll be no AI because quantum events are taking place in brain cells and computers aren't powerful enough. I read his book and I don't agree that he made the case.
You also didn't answer how if he says no one knows how intelligence works that he, the great knowledgeable one with his high highfalutin quantum mechanics, can know that it's not possible? If he says himself he doesn't understand it how can he see himself as competent to pronounce any future trends? Many other, just as high highfalutin, people think differently. Myself I just use common sense. People keep saying computers can't do this or that or the other until they get to the level of power necessary to match the task, then they do them. A simple extrapolation of the power now and the expected power leads to the conclusion that we'll be over matched very soon. Say 25 to 30 years.