• kadup@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 hours ago

    That entire paragraph is much better at supporting the precise opposite argument. Computers can beat Kasparov at chess, but they’re clearly not thinking when making a move - even if we use the most open biological definitions for thinking.

    • cyd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 hours ago

      By that metric, you can argue Kasparov isn’t thinking during chess, either. A lot of human chess “thinking” is recalling memorized openings, evaluating positions many moves deep, and other tasks that map to what a chess engine does. Of course Kasparov is thinking, but then you have to conclude that the AI is thinking too. Thinking isn’t a magic process, nor is it tightly coupled to human-like brain processes as we like to think.

    • Grimy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      17 hours ago

      No, it shows how certain people misunderstand the meaning of the word.

      You have called npcs in video games “AI” for a decade, yet you were never implying they were somehow intelligent. The whole argument is strangely inconsistent.

      • Clent@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Intellegence has a very clear definition.

        It’s requires the ability to acquire knowledge, understand knowledge and use knowledge.

        No one has been able to create an system that can understand knowledge, therefor me none of it is artificial intelligence. Each generation is merely more and more complex knowledge models. Useful in many ways but never intelligent.

      • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        16 hours ago

        Who is “you”?

        Just because some dummies supposedly think that NPCs are “AI”, that doesn’t make it so. I don’t consider checkers to be a litmus test for “intelligence”.

        • Grimy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          16 hours ago

          “You” applies to anyone that doesnt understand what AI means. It’s a portmanteau word for a lot of things.

          Npcs ARE AI. AI doesnt mean “human level intelligence” and never did. Read the wiki if you need help understanding.