I would think that the more “AI problems” that are used up, the more that will be found. Only when an AI of a certain level is achieved will we spot the next places for it to be used.
I think that the prospects for general artificial intelligence are getting worse.
I’m unimpressed by your arguments. I’m not going to deal with the fact that you don’t grapple with the arguments for why to expect general AI but rather just focus on the claims you do make.
The usual story for how general artificial intelligence will come about involves recursive self-improvement.
Is this really the case? The argument at least around these parts is about recursive self-improvement after one has an AI. It is hard to see why recursive self-improvement would be that useful for a not very intelligent AI. I’d be curious to see what evidence you have that this is the “usual story.”
Let’s take your narrative for granted. You then say:
Today’s machine learning techniques certainly involve machines improving through learning, but they are not self-improving. The researchers add more data or change algorithms. The researchers learn more about machine learning, but the computers don’t, they merely do machine learing in the domain in which they operate.
This has been false for some time. Eurisko was made in the late 1970s and was able to modify its own heuristics.
The successes that “AI” research has today is poisoning the field. It is not building a foundation, but it is, slowly and in a piecemeal fashion, solving the problems that justify funding the field. Eventually there will be no money for research into general artificial intelligence and that will be the end of the dream. (Hmm, has this already happened?)
This seems like your strongest argument, that the research funding for general AI will become small if we do a very good job at solving many different AI tasks. However, even that won’t dry up funds completely, just a lot. So that would be an argument for why we would expect general AI to take a while, not why we’d expect it to not occur. And without more details, it isn’t at all clear what timeline to actually expect or to work how how much this will influence when general AI occur.
This has been false for some time. Eurisko was made in the late 1970s and was able to modify its own heuristics.
I’m not sure that’s fair. Eurisko could do that only within a very limited domain (a type of strategy game), and there hasn’t been anything similar since, as far as I know.
I think that the prospects for general artificial intelligence are getting worse.
This argument might be better-received if you posted it, or an excerpt, here, rather than just supplying a link.
I would think that the more “AI problems” that are used up, the more that will be found. Only when an AI of a certain level is achieved will we spot the next places for it to be used.
I’m unimpressed by your arguments. I’m not going to deal with the fact that you don’t grapple with the arguments for why to expect general AI but rather just focus on the claims you do make.
Is this really the case? The argument at least around these parts is about recursive self-improvement after one has an AI. It is hard to see why recursive self-improvement would be that useful for a not very intelligent AI. I’d be curious to see what evidence you have that this is the “usual story.”
Let’s take your narrative for granted. You then say:
This has been false for some time. Eurisko was made in the late 1970s and was able to modify its own heuristics.
This seems like your strongest argument, that the research funding for general AI will become small if we do a very good job at solving many different AI tasks. However, even that won’t dry up funds completely, just a lot. So that would be an argument for why we would expect general AI to take a while, not why we’d expect it to not occur. And without more details, it isn’t at all clear what timeline to actually expect or to work how how much this will influence when general AI occur.
I’m not sure that’s fair. Eurisko could do that only within a very limited domain (a type of strategy game), and there hasn’t been anything similar since, as far as I know.