Note that FAI research, AI research, and AGI research are three very different things.
Perhaps FAI differs, but AI and AGI really just describe project scale/scope/ambition variance within the same field.
It’s also worth remembering that AGI research isn’t taken very seriously by some (most?) AI researchers,
Most of the high profile AI researchers all seem to point to AGI as the long term goal, and this appears just as true today as it was in the early days. There may be a trend to downplay the AGI-Singularity associations.
Perhaps FAI differs, but AI and AGI really just describe project scale/scope/ambition variance within the same field.
My understanding is that AI and AGI differ in terms of who is currently carrying out the research. The term “AI research” (when contrasted with “AGI research”) usually refers to narrow-AI research projects carried out by computer scientists. “AGI research” has become more associated with independent projects and the AGI community, which has differentiated itself somewhat from the AI/CS community at large. Still, there are many prominent AI researchers and computer scientists who are involved with AGI, e.g. these people. “FAI research” is something completely different—it’s not a recognized field (the term only has meaning to people who have heard of the Singularity Institute), and currently it consists of philosophy-of-AI papers.
Most of the high profile AI researchers all seem to point to AGI as the long term goal, and this appears just as true today as it was in the early days.
Yes, but they are much more pessimistic about when such intelligences will be developed than they were, say, 30 years ago, and academics no longer start AI research projects with the announcement that they will create general intelligence in a short period of time. Independent AGI projects of the sort we see today do make those kind of grandiose announcements, which is why they attract scorn from academics.
There may be a trend to downplay the AGI-Singularity associations.
Perhaps FAI differs, but AI and AGI really just describe project scale/scope/ambition variance within the same field.
Most of the high profile AI researchers all seem to point to AGI as the long term goal, and this appears just as true today as it was in the early days. There may be a trend to downplay the AGI-Singularity associations.
My understanding is that AI and AGI differ in terms of who is currently carrying out the research. The term “AI research” (when contrasted with “AGI research”) usually refers to narrow-AI research projects carried out by computer scientists. “AGI research” has become more associated with independent projects and the AGI community, which has differentiated itself somewhat from the AI/CS community at large. Still, there are many prominent AI researchers and computer scientists who are involved with AGI, e.g. these people. “FAI research” is something completely different—it’s not a recognized field (the term only has meaning to people who have heard of the Singularity Institute), and currently it consists of philosophy-of-AI papers.
Yes, but they are much more pessimistic about when such intelligences will be developed than they were, say, 30 years ago, and academics no longer start AI research projects with the announcement that they will create general intelligence in a short period of time. Independent AGI projects of the sort we see today do make those kind of grandiose announcements, which is why they attract scorn from academics.
Definitely.