Then we may as well define my left shoe as AI for all the good subjective arbitrary definition does. Objective reality is what it is, and what’s being called “AI” objectively is not. If you wanted to give it a name with accuracy it would be “comparison and extrapolation engine” but there’s no intelligence behind it beyond what the human designer had. Artificial is accurate though.
Arguing that AI is not AI is like arguing that irrational numbers are not “irrational” because they are not “deprived of reason”.
Edit: You might be thinking of “artificial general intelligence”, which is a theoretical sub-category of AI. Anyone claiming they have AGI or will have AGI within a decade should be treated with great skepticism.
Then we may as well define my left shoe as AI for all the good subjective arbitrary definition does.
Tiny fist shaking intensifies.
This sort of hyper-pedantic dictionary-authoritarianism is not how language works. Nor is your ridiculous “well I can just define it however I like then” straw-man. These are terms with a long history of usage.
But you have to admit that there is great confusion that arises when the general populace hears “AI will take away jobs”. People literally think that there’s some magical thinking machine. Not speculation on my part at all, people literally think this.
Then we may as well define my left shoe as AI for all the good subjective arbitrary definition does. Objective reality is what it is, and what’s being called “AI” objectively is not. If you wanted to give it a name with accuracy it would be “comparison and extrapolation engine” but there’s no intelligence behind it beyond what the human designer had. Artificial is accurate though.
This has been standard usage for nearly 70 years. I highly recommend reading the original proposal by McCarthy et al. from 1955: https://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/history/dartmouth/dartmouth.html
Arguing that AI is not AI is like arguing that irrational numbers are not “irrational” because they are not “deprived of reason”.
Edit: You might be thinking of “artificial general intelligence”, which is a theoretical sub-category of AI. Anyone claiming they have AGI or will have AGI within a decade should be treated with great skepticism.
deleted by creator
This take sure assumes a lot about what intelligence really is.
Who’s to say we’re not a collection of parlor tricks ourselves?
How do we know the universe wasn’t created like this last Thursday? Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem.
Tiny fist shaking intensifies.
This sort of hyper-pedantic dictionary-authoritarianism is not how language works. Nor is your ridiculous “well I can just define it however I like then” straw-man. These are terms with a long history of usage.
But you have to admit that there is great confusion that arises when the general populace hears “AI will take away jobs”. People literally think that there’s some magical thinking machine. Not speculation on my part at all, people literally think this.
instead of basing your definition of AI on SciFi, base it on the one computer scientists have been using for decades.
and of course, AI is the buzzword right now and everyone is using it in their products. But that’s another story. LLMs are AI.