5 ms·

This is such a silly and trivially debunked claim. I'm shocked it comes up so frequently. These systems can generate novel content. They manifestly haven't jus

• throw_nbvc1234 4y ago
  Coming up with novel content doesn't necessarily mean it can reason (depending on your definition of reason). Take 3 examples: 1) Copying existing bridges 2) Merging concepts from multiple existing bridges in a novel way with much less effort then a human would take to do the same. 3) Understanding the underlying physics and generating novel solutions to building a bridge The difference between 2 and 3 isn't necessarily the output but how it got to that output; focusing on the output, the lines are blurry. If the AI is able to explain why it came to a solution you can tease out the differences between 2 and 3. And it's probably arguable that for many subject matters (most art?) the difference between 2 and 3 might not matter all that much. But you wouldn't want an AI to design a new bridge unsupervised without knowing if it was following method 2 or method 3.
• mrguyorama 4y ago
  Children produce novel sentences all the time, simply because they don't know how stuff is supposed to go together. "Novel content" isn't a step forward. "Novel content that is valid and correct and possibly an innovation" has always been the claim, but there's no mathematical or scientific proof. How much of this stuff is just a realization of the classic "infinite monkeys and typewriters" concept?