Negotiators from the European Parliament and the bloc’s 27 member countries overcame big differences to sign a tentative political agreement for the Artificial Intelligence Act.
And I would just like to say, that the term ‘AI’ is a marketing term; all the generative models are just complex digital Galton Boards. Put thing in, different thing comes out. But if you leave them alone, nothing happens. Is that really intelligence, or is that just data transformation?
I’m far more concerned about the things that do things when you leave them alone… Drones, Boston Robotics, that kind of thing.
AI is a term I was taught a long time ago to mean that a computer has transcended and become sentient. Artificial Intelligence.
VI - is what I think we almost have now. Simulated intelligence. It’s at this point now where so many people think that Ai can think for itself that we may as well call it VI just to get on with the progress.
I’m a researcher in ML and that’s not the definition that I’ve heard. Normally the way I’ve seen AI defined is any computational method with the ability to complete tasks that are thought to require intelligence.
This definition admittedly sucks. It’s very vague, and it comes with the problem that the bar for requiring intelligence shifts every time the field solves something new. We sort of go “well, given these relatively simple methods could solve it, I guess it couldn’t have really required intelligence.”
The definition you listed is generally more in line with AGI, which is what people likely think of when they hear the term AI.
Maybe a defined term should be used. The use of the term “AI” makes me puke in my mouth because most people associate it with “omg the robots are coming!” when it’s really just a program still. So much so that people have made videos of them implementing Ai inside of video games (see: Matrix game) and then contemplate if the computer program is suffering.
5 links later, here are the actual rules (apparently): https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_21_1682
And I would just like to say, that the term ‘AI’ is a marketing term; all the generative models are just complex digital Galton Boards. Put thing in, different thing comes out. But if you leave them alone, nothing happens. Is that really intelligence, or is that just data transformation?
I’m far more concerned about the things that do things when you leave them alone… Drones, Boston Robotics, that kind of thing.
AI is a term I was taught a long time ago to mean that a computer has transcended and become sentient. Artificial Intelligence.
VI - is what I think we almost have now. Simulated intelligence. It’s at this point now where so many people think that Ai can think for itself that we may as well call it VI just to get on with the progress.
I’m a researcher in ML and that’s not the definition that I’ve heard. Normally the way I’ve seen AI defined is any computational method with the ability to complete tasks that are thought to require intelligence.
This definition admittedly sucks. It’s very vague, and it comes with the problem that the bar for requiring intelligence shifts every time the field solves something new. We sort of go “well, given these relatively simple methods could solve it, I guess it couldn’t have really required intelligence.”
The definition you listed is generally more in line with AGI, which is what people likely think of when they hear the term AI.
Maybe a defined term should be used. The use of the term “AI” makes me puke in my mouth because most people associate it with “omg the robots are coming!” when it’s really just a program still. So much so that people have made videos of them implementing Ai inside of video games (see: Matrix game) and then contemplate if the computer program is suffering.
Virtual/Simulated Intelligence. That’s a far better term. I’m going to start using that.
That’s from April 2021. I wonder what are the new rules?