[FRIAM] AI Musings

[Frank Wimberly]

Not particularly relevant to your main point but Raj Reddy, close colleague
of Newell and Simon, once said, "It is easier use AI to replace a college
professor than a bulldozer operator" or words tho that effect.

Frank

---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Thu, Mar 30, 2023, 8:50 AM Prof David West <profwest at fastmail.fm> wrote:

> The "AI Pause" made national TV news yesterday (long after those on this
> list noted and reacted to it) and that made me revisit a theme I have
> thought about since Newell, Simon, and Shaw created Logic Theorist.
>
> Advocates take a caricature (perhaps too strong a word) of human
> intelligence, write a program to emulate it and declare the program
> "intelligent."
>
> The original conceit: true intelligence was the kind of thinking exhibited
> by college professors and scientists. Almost trivial to emulate (Newell and
> Simon programmed Logic Theorist on 3x5 cards before Shaw was able to
> implement on a computer).
>
> Maybe reading—correctly converting text to sound, like a child—was more
> indicative of human intelligence, and Sejnowski created NetTalk. that,
> somewhat eerily, produced discoveries of sounds, and errors, and achieved
> near perfect ability to "read." Listen to the tapes sometime and contrast
> them with tapes of a human child learning to read. Of course, comprehension
> of what was read did not make the cut.
>
> State of the art improved dramatically and the caricatures of human
> intelligence are more sophisticated and the achievements of the programs
> more interesting.
>
> But, it seems to me there is still a critical gap. We can program an AI
> (or let one learn) to fly a commercial jet as well or better than a human
> pilot—BUT, could even the best of of breed of such an AI pull a
> Shullenberger and land on the Hudson River?
>
> Another factor behind the "hysteria" (sorry for the sexism) over AIs
> causing massive unemployment is a corollary to the caricaturization of
> human intelligence. Since the Industrial Revolution, and certainly since
> the age of Taylorism and the rise of automation; work itself has been
> dehumanizing.
>
> If you define human work in terms of what can be done by a computer then
> it is tautological to claim an AI is intelligent because it can perform
> human work.
>
> I was contemplating ChatAIs and quickly realized that my
> profession—college professor—was one at immense risk of replacement. I
> would bet good money that a ChatAI could produce, and maybe deliver,
> lectures far better than any I created in 30 years teaching. And probably
> most, if not all, of the presentations I made at professional conferences
> over the years.
>
> I am still vain enough to think that some of the papers and books I have
> written are beyond an AI, and certain that no AI could do as well in
> spontaneious Q&A after a presentation than I.
>
> Bottom line, I still believe that AI can and does equate to HI, only when
> some aspect of HI is ommitted from the equation. This is not essentialism,
> but analogous to the digitization of a sine wave, no matter the finite
> sampling rate, there is always some missing information.
>
> davew
>
> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> archives:  5/2017 thru present
> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
>   1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20230330/0ff3cefa/attachment.html>