The Great A.I. Awakening
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
Russell's student Wittgenstein originally supported this approach, but later demolished it in his book Philosophical Investigations. He showed that any useful language would be imperfect.
It seems to me that the fact the machine learning approach is succeeding where syntactical AI failed helps demonstrate Wittgenstein was right.
sorry, couldn't resist ;-)
Isn't "AGI" (artificial general intelligence) typically what is used in this context? Or do you mean something else? I like that term a bit more because at least it becomes somewhat clear what's the difference to the machine learning algorithms we already have.
"Strong AI's goal is to develop artificial intelligence to the point where the machine's intellectual capability is functionally equal to a human's."
I think that is so because the realities that intelligence is supposed to deal with are such that they can't be fully described by any single or multiple systems of precise concepts. That was Wittgenstein's point, and also many other philosophers such as Husserl, Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty, Ricoeur, Whitehead, Putnam, Strawson, Rorty, and all the Pragmatists.
Every single day something is being called AI. Every time the output is relatively shit and doesn't improve in any noticeable way even over long periods of time.
Remember when Siri was AI? Hahaha. Siri is a borderline outsourced retard who barely understands English.
Please stop fantasising everything is AI. It's not. It's marketing.