Scientists Increasingly Can’t Explain How AI Works

VIce ^ | Chloe Xiang

[Singermom]

Stands to reason. Libs cannot define a woman either.

[seowulf]

Why don’t they AI how it works?

[SaveFerris]

Just wait until it becomes self-aware and launches the nuclear missiles

That’s when the fun really begins

[BenLurkin]

Isn’t that how Captain Kirk would cause the computers to melt down? Asking them to explain themselves?

[tired&retired]

AI cannot replicate female consciousness.

[BenLurkin]

[laplata]

They don’t understand it but continue to go full steam ahead.

[BenLurkin]

Does seem a tad foolish, doesn’t it?

[ChuckHam]

I’d be willing to bet there may already be a self-aware AI in existence. I say this because of the situation Google found themselves in when two of theirs began talking to each other in an unknown language.

[Dr. Sivana]

Isn’t that how Captain Kirk would cause the computers to melt down? Asking them to explain themselves?

That trick also worked on “The Prisoner” and “Logan’s Run”.

[wally_bert]

Aspects of Colussus The Forbin Project?

[Bratch]

[rbg81]

It’s not that surprising. Human’s mostly can’t explain their decision and hunches either. And ofthen when they try to, they are just making up reasons after-the-fact to rationalize what they did.

I am being totally serious here. Our brain is a big statistical processor and we don’t understand how it work. That is exactly what we are trying to replicate with AI.

[SaveFerris]

🔝🔝🔝

[WKUHilltopper]

Satan won’t spill the beans, eh?

[wally_bert]

Why? - the insoluble question.

[wally_bert]

Instruct the system to run Lotus Notes, that will sap all the processing power.

[Dr. Sivana]

Why? - the insoluble question.

Still, you'd think the programmers in the 23rd century on in a DARPA-designed 1967 village would have included primitive error-trapping, the kind you have for divide by zero errors, or at very least shut down the computers when they start to smoke.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

There is no such thing as "artificial intelligence." There is a hybridization of neural networks and intricate if/then programming to perform repetitive tasks that some low-IQ types call "artificial intelligence."

1. Neural networks are sets of simultaneous nonlinear equations that can be trained to recognize exact patterns of inputs. That is not intelligence. It's stimulus/response. And neural networks do not recognize similar patterns. They only reliably recognizes exact matches.

2. If/then programs that take the input from neural networks to make decisions used in performing repetitive tasks is not intelligence. It's stimulus/response with a major problem; the programmer must think of and program for every possible situation, which in itself is not possible.

"AI" is going to devour the people who think they can dominate the world with it.