• technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    16 hours ago

    I’m going to write a program to play tic-tac-toe. If y’all don’t think it’s “AI”, then you’re just haters. Nothing will ever be good enough for y’all. You want scientific evidence of intelligence?!?! I can’t even define intelligence so take that! \s

    Seriously tho. This person is arguing that a checkers program is “AI”. It kinda demonstrates the loooong history of this grift.

    • JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      16 hours ago

      It is. And has always been. “Artificial Intelligence” doesn’t mean a feeling thinking robot person (that would fall under AGI or artificial conciousness), it’s a vast field of research in computer science with many, many things under it.

      • Endmaker@ani.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        16 hours ago

        ITT: people who obviously did not study computer science or AI at at least an undergraduate level.

        Y’all are too patient. I can’t be bothered to spend the time to give people free lessons.

        • antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          12 hours ago

          Wow, I would deeply apologise on the behalf of all of us uneducated proles having opinions on stuff that we’re bombarded with daily through the media.

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

          The computer science industry isn’t the authority on artificial intelligence it thinks it is. The industry is driven by a level of hubris that causes people to step beyond the bounds of science and into the realm of humanities without acknowledgment.

    • LandedGentry@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      16 hours ago

      Yeah that’s exactly what I took from the above comment as well.

      I have a pretty simple bar: until we’re debating the ethics of turning it off or otherwise giving it rights, it isn’t intelligent. No it’s not scientific, but it’s a hell of a lot more consistent than what all the AI evangelists espouse. And frankly if we’re talking about the ethics of how to treat something we consider intelligent, we have to go beyond pure scientific benchmarks anyway. It becomes a philosophy/ethics discussion.

      Like crypto it has become a pseudo religion. Challenges to dogma and orthodoxy are shouted down, the non-believers are not welcome to critique it.