Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Instantly?

Instinctively?

Let me introduce you to "peek-a-boo", a simple parent child game for infants.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peekaboo

> In early sensorimotor stages, the infant is completely unable to comprehend object permanence.



You do realize there is a difference between an infant and a child, right?

An infant will *grow* and develop into a child that is capable of learning and making judgments on it's own. AI never does this.

Play "peek-a-boo" with an infant and it will learn and extrapolate from this info and eventually be able to recognize a person hiding under a box even if it has never actually seen it before. AI won't.


Learn and extrapolate are contradictions of instinct and instantly.

"Infant" is a specific age range for a stage of "child".[1] Unless you intend to specify "school age child, 6-17 years"

https://www.npcmc.com/2022/07/08/the-5-stages-of-early-child...


Learn and extrapolate are contradictions of instinct and instantly.

No.

The learning and extrapolation is instinctive. You don't have to teach an infant how to learn.

Once an infant has developed into a child, the extrapolation starts to occur very quickly --- nearly instantaneously.


>AI never does this.

AI never does this now...

We're probably one or two generational architecture changes from a system that can do it.


Can you point at these proposed architectures? If they are just around the corner there should be decent enough papers and prototypes by now, right?


You do realize that people have been making predictions just like yours for decades?

"Real" AI is perpetually just around the corner.


You also realize that when AI accomplishes something we move the goalposts leading to the AI effect?


Perhaps the goalposts were always in the wrong place.

AI researchers tend to use their own definitions of intelligence - playing chess/go, having conversations about trivia that require no true emotional insight, "making" "art", writing code, driving.

What if those are all peripheral side effects and not at all necessary to human AGI?


The goalposts were moved by marketing hype about a decade ago, when people started claiming that the then-new systems were "AI". Before that, the goalposts were always far away, at what we now call AGI because the term AI has been cheapened in order to sell stuff.


No, AGI replaced AI for general intelligence before the current craze, AI was “cheapened” several AI hyoe cycles ago, for (among other things) rule-based expert systems. Which is why games have had “AI” long before the set of techniques at the center of the current AI hype cycle were developed.


Heh, that's funny. I've seen the term "AI" used in many games for a computer opponent, but somehow I've never connected that use with the general term.


AI doesnt. There is a difference.


nice try but .. in the wild, many animals are born that display navigation and awareness within minutes .. Science calls it "instinct" but I am not sure it is completely understood..


? Op specified "human".

Deer are able to walk within moments of birth. Humans are not deer, and the gestation is entirely different. As are instincts.

Neither deer nor humans instinctually understand man made materials.


Our cats understand cardboard boxes, and the concept of hiding in them. I don't know whether they do so instinctually, but as young kittens it didn't take them long.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: