>>11681450>No matter how much you 'teach' some piece of software it cannot achieve the abiltiy to think or reason, it's just very complex decision-treesI'm not really an advocate for ML, but this is a fairly reductive view because it's not really aware of the sophisticated methods we have to search and learn, which is the basis of most ML. If you're going to address ML, you need to have actual rigorous reasoning as to why certain tasks, human or not, don't reduce down to complex decision-trees. Furthermore, you need to actually address ML without going off the "dae AI dumb because I feel like it is."
>we need to understand how our brains workthat's not the goal of AI, nor is it really a necessity since even talking about general intelligence, human intelligence is an arbitrary model that doesn't necessarily help us solve problems we want to solve.
>it's not little bits and pieces of itif you have hard evidence that the brain can make decisions on arbitrary global structure without any consideration for local structure, be my guest and elucidate.
>we need to be able to scan brainshot damn you really don't know anything, do you? everything you exposited on reads like a highschooler
