Stands to reason. Libs cannot define a woman either.
Why don’t they AI how it works?
Just wait until it becomes self-aware and launches the nuclear missiles
That’s when the fun really begins
They don’t understand it but continue to go full steam ahead.
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.
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.
Satan won’t spill the beans, eh?
Neural networks of a sufficient size display emergent behavior; that is, behavior that can’t be predicted from the physical construction. The problem up to now is how to build them at the scale required - say, 86 billion nodes just to pick a non-random number. We have such systems now - they’re called “babies”. Some people might be understandably reluctant to give the launch codes to a baby, but we gave them to Joe Biden, now didn’t we?
My favorite example for this at various AI conferences is the deep learning autonomous driving vehicle vs. my Amish neighbors with their horse and buggy. Both are autonomous and make decisions we can't explain or hope to understand. But if they have an acceptable safety record, we can learn to not only live with them, but depend on them. If for a cutting edge military AI system, I can show that it has one accident in 1,000,000 miles of driving, can perform 24/7 and reduces fuel cost by 15% and operational costs by 300% that should be good enough. But when it finally has one accident, and does something scary like accelerate towards and run over a person, most of the pearl-clutchers will move to eliminate AI. Ignore the fact that it has already saved dozens of lives and saved millions of dollars. For some reason we treat the horses differently; they panic or otherwise do irrational things, and it leads to deaths sometimes for my Amish neighbors. I jumped in front of and stopped a horse team running wild pulling a giant mower blade once, the kids running the team lost control of them and they were in a blind panic likely to injure themselves or people... so yeah it does happen. But we accept it, because they still have a dependable record of safety that you can prove by simply looking at how rare these incidents are. Bottom line-- let people who understand math and statistics make these decisions, not emotional children with worthless academic credentials.
bm
Crowd sourcing trends to the mean.
For example, if you want the computer to choose a song for you by a particular artist, it will have learned the most popular ones and offer them more often.
Crowd sourcing trends to the mean.
For example, if you want the computer to choose a song for you by a particular artist, it will have learned the most popular ones and offer them more often. Which adds to the data that that song is chosen more often.
You could say the same about cited references in scientific papers, say.
If the coders developing AI can’t explain how it works, I don’t trust them. How the F do you code a process you don’t understand? Plus, we need to run psych tests & security searches on AI coders. What if some trans-activist codes refusal to acknowledge biology into surgical AI? This could be extremely dangerous.