I can think of an IBM executive saying it, Musk said it... I ran out of time though or I would compile examples.
We can debate whether it is important. Some people think not. On 9/11/21, Rob Freeman <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 12, 2021 at 7:37 AM Mike Archbold <[email protected]> wrote: > >> ... >> The reality is that nobody claims their machine is conscious -- but >> regularly people claim their machine understands, but they don't say >> what that means > > > Got any examples of people saying their machine understands Mike? I don't > doubt you are right. But I'm curious for concrete examples. > > In more ambitious discussion groups like this it may be common. > > For state of the art vision I would guess people use the word "recognize" > more often. > > Maybe some smart speaker type systems say their system "understands". > > In the deep learning context it wouldn't be hard to trace such a claim of > "understanding" back to an assumption that "understanding" assigns a > category, or maps to simple operations, like operations of rules. For > instance when you say "OK Google, remind me..." > > Just because it is easy to guess that this is what is meant, does not mean > the question you are asking is not a good question. It makes the assumption > explicit, and causes us to speculate if "a mapping to fixed forms or rules" > is the only possible assumption. > > But there may be other examples of people claiming their system > "understands". Any more concrete examples? ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T2ee04a3eb9a964b5-Mcc10ff54e4801593ad44d967 Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
