I acutally do, since I did AI as a final-year elective in my CS degree and machine learning was a significant part of it
Oh boy, a whole half an elective. I strongly suspect you didn't "acutally" write any real code or implement any kind of machine learning. I actually have implemented real machine learning solutions that used everything from neural nets to HMM to bayesian statistics. I can promise you that in all of those occasions, the program was working exactly as programmed and not exhibiting any signs of even your wikipedia definition of Intelligence.
So instead of just continually being a dick and insulting my knowledge
I'm not trying to be, but there comes a point where I just can't sugar coat it anymore while still maintaining some semblance of rationality. You really either have no clue what you're talking about, or you're trying to get into an argument over semantics by making the term "intelligence" out to mean less than most people take it to mean.
Either way, 20 years ago it was people like you who set AI research back 20+ years by over promising on what AI actually was to the point no one would fund it when it became clear the false expectations weren't being met. Now your generation is posed to set it back again by going around spouting off clickbait headlines about how an animatronic puppet is an intelligent machine and switching it off is akin to murder.
What we see in chatterbots and neural nets isn't intelligence, or even the precursor to it. It's pure mimicry and nothing more.
actually never mind I have nothing to prove here or learn from you.
way to give up. I'd have loved to give you some more specifics if you'd actually have defined some terms and quit trying to argue semantics.