Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re: Who is doing the building? (Score 1) 93

K. S. Kyosuke, We don't know how humans solve problems, so how can we know anything about the fidelity of so-called AI? For example, how does a human look at a chess board and evaluate positions to determine the next move? Nobody knows. Computers do an exhaustive search of available moves to a certain depth, which humans are incapable of, so that disproves your claim straight off.


Comment Re: Putting "intelli" in a product's name... (Score 1) 93

Incidentally, Dagger2, claiming that challenging the truth of a scientific theory is part of some kind of conspiratorial "effect" (as in "AI effect") is backwards. Science is not a consensus enterprise. It only takes a single unanswerable challenge to unwind centuries of a mistaken theory. The burden of proof is on the researcher, not the challenger. Moreover, the challenger has no obligation to provide a better theory.

This is called "The Science Effect."

Comment Re: Putting "intelli" in a product's name... (Score 1) 93

Sorry Pamela. Every time WIlbur and Orville right made a test flight that didn't sustain self-powered flight, the world was totally justified in saying "Nope, sorry, that's not flying". And to say AI is "getting closer" is totally bogus. We have no idea that AI research is even going in the right direction, let alone getting closer to synthetic thinking. At least Wilbur and Orville were actually making progress.

Comment Putting "intelli" in a product's name... (Score 1) 93

...doesn't imbue it with AI. This is all more of the same Artificial Intelligence hype that the AI industry has been fabricating since it discovered hype equal funding dollars a decade ago. Helping a coder write test coverage is not AI. It's automation. I challenge anyone to show a real example of AI in software development today. And no fair calling neural networks AI. They are just a mal-named ordinary computer data structure. AI research has simply gone from not working to not working with money.

Comment Re: Show me the data (Score 1) 198

But we have no data on miles driven with self-driving cars interacting with each other, which is the real end-game environment of self-driving cars. There likely are huge new failure domains, such a deadly embraces wth real death, race conditions on rainy roads, etc.

So there is no easy statistical answer based on miles driven.

Comment What we know about self-driving interactions (Score 1) 198

Nothing. We know nothing about how self-driving cars interact with each other. And even less about how millions of self-driving cars interact with each other. And even less than that about a mix of millions of self-driving and human-driving cars. We know nothing. So predictions about long term safety balance are meaningless. Wait until we know something; until then do nothing.

Slashdot Top Deals

Computers don't actually think. You just think they think. (We think.)