Note: This does not resemble my current opinion anymore. I’ve read some more about this topic and had some interesting new thoughts. See here for a first update.
I don’t think the current state of “artificial intelligence” really has proven that it earns the great title of intelligence, as I believe it’s all still just a sophisticated application of statistics on large amounts of data. I prefer the title “machine learning”, as in my opinion that describes the process of adjusting the parameters of statistical methods based on the given data adequately.
I’m not even sure if intelligence and consciousness can be simulated by a computer. Because if they could, then the speed of execution surely wouldn’t matter to that fact, right? And if speed didn’t matter, one could just as well represent the (deterministic!) calculations of a finite computer on a piece of paper or by arranging some stones on a large field. Granted, it’d be somewhat slower than a modern computer and the paper would have to be sufficiently large, but in the end flipping bits, drawing on paper, and moving rocks in a systematic way is just the same when it comes to representing computation. So that’d mean if we arranged a bunch of stones on a large field in a certain pattern and then used some fancy (but deterministic) rules to move them around, we’d create consciousness?! I can’t really believe that’s true.
But how is a human brain any different?? In the end it’s also just biological wires exchanging electricity (+ some chemistry added to the process)…
I can’t really grasp that. Do my thoughts make sense? Where’s the flaw?
There’s an interesting discussion about this text on Hacker News.
If you want to give me some feedback or share your opinion, please contact me via email.
© Niklas Bühler, 2021 RSS / Contact me