Hacker News Reader

Comment by Flankk | Hacker News Reader

I'm bearish on AI. The human brain does far more than just learn things. AI still has no ability to reason or think creatively. So we're not even in the ballpark. The space has been worked on for 50 years. I'm not sure why people think the field will now start to progress rapidly.

View on HN

That's why the singularity is theoretical. Going back to the OP, that's the point where a system is able to improve itself better/faster than the humans who designed it can. Maybe 30, 100 years or never.

Another point on the way there is when AI chat is indistinguishable from humans. People are going to be scammed or influenced all over the place. Scams, influence campaigns, radicalization, which are already industrial in scale are gonna explode. I think this pretty soon, 5-10 years

AI systems can search through millions of molecules to find a drug. How is that different from Thomas Edison trying 1000 filaments for a light bulb?

A.I. can generate a million art pieces or a love song, but it won’t feel the same as a just one from a human. At least not yet.

It could if the audience did not know the piece was generated by a machine. This has already been proven when art critics gushed praise over works which turned out to have been made by a chimpanzee [1].

[1] https://www.ladbible.com/funny/awesome-the-hoax-that-fooled-...

Unless you're autistic or awkward there's no easier way to deceive people than to get them to perceive that "spark" of another being. Look at how people see faces in plant stems, rock formations on Mars, etc.

One of the few things G. W. Bush regrets is that time he said he looked in Vladimir Putin's eyes and got a sense of his soul.

A.I. search is more creative than most people think; Edison himself said "Genius is one percent inspiration, ninety-nine percent perspiration."

People have been writing programs since the late 1960s that imitate the later works of

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piet_Mondrian

these might even fool an art historian if you made them with an oil painting robot.

ELIZA could pass as a human somewhat in the 1960s. On a day when I'm feeling awkward I feel envious of GPT-3 which, being a pile of nothing but biases devoid of understanding, passes as a neurotypical really well.

https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/limits-literature

in this way.

Language is a rathole.

Interesting AI synthetic chemistry systems work ab initio modeling how a molecule interacts with proteins.

and where do they get their training dat... oh,right, literature.

AI isn't just machine learning. Searching huge spaces (Chess, Travelling Salesman, etc.) is a paradigm in and of itself.

It's possible to model molecular binding with nothing but physics.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com