Forgot your password?

Comment: Re: AI is always "right around the corner". (Score 1) 556

I don't know how to determine this, quantitatively or otherwise. It's an interesting question once machine translation gets better, but for now I consider it obvious that something like Google translation does not know what it's doing. Having access to and having translated a large existing courpus of text is obviously not enough, as Google certainly has analyzed more text than a human translator does, and still is wrong whenever there is the slightest possibility of ambiguity (i.e., all the time, in practice).

Anyway, TFA was not about machine translation, but AI. A human translator who translates a text knows that he is translating a text. I am not worried that a computer will, by 2045.

Comment: Re: AI is always "right around the corner". (Score 1) 556

The machine has no fucking clue about what it is translating.

Neither do you, it's just an illusion caused by a simple computer called the brain. Everything you think you know about yourself is an illusion. You do not make decisions, you do not have free will, your are nothing special. You are a biochemical computer that is 100% deterministic. Sorry to burst your bubble, but it's true.

This is wholly beside the point. Even if I am deterministic, any human translator understands the text he is translating to a quite large degree, or else nobody will bother with him. The best translation machines understand exactly 0%

Comment: Re: AI is always "right around the corner". (Score 2) 556

Welcome to the

Q: if there was a human dumb savant who could translate instantly between multiple languages, though without understanding how he did it (think Rainman), would you say he was not intelligent? Why? What is intelligence? We are inconsistent - we praise humans as intelligent when they can perform some complex algorithm well (chess), and yet as soon as a computer beats a human, or all humans, we denigrate the task as "not intelligence". Often the reason is "just an algorithm", but as a neuroscientist knows, that is a poor excuse - it's algorithms all the way down.

Yeah, we have no idea what constitutes intelligence either. Got any other old news?

Anyway, my post was not about "without understanding how he did it" but knowing what the translator is doing, how a sense of self relates to this, the history of the text in question and its context, the context oft he content itself (without which is appears impossible to translate even remotely correctly, as Google Translators mindless efforts seem to be showing), the context of the media, and many other aspects or translation process and translation material.

Comment: Re: AI is always "right around the corner". (Score 5, Insightful) 556

The machine has no fucking clue about what it is translating. Not the media, not the content, not even what to and from which languages it is translating (other than a variable somewhere, which is not "knowing". None whatsoever. Until it does, it has nothing to do with AI in the sense of TAFA. (The alarmist fucking article)

Comment: Re:Ai is inevitable (Score 1) 339

by Knuckles (#47117259) Attached to: The Singularity Is Sci-Fi's Faith-Based Initiative

They produce them, they are not building them. It's obvious that brains can exist, but we have no clue how despite our advances so far. And if we figure out how it could be some kind of quantum stuff that makes it just as impossible for us, for any foreseeable time, as building galaxies is - which also were produced.

The reason that every major university maintains a department of mathematics is that it's cheaper than institutionalizing all those people.