
The Artificial Intelligence Revolution: A Special Report, Pt. 1 - wallflower
http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/features/inside-the-artificial-intelligence-revolution-a-special-report-pt-1-20160229
======
dr_zoidberg
> We may be on the verge of creating a new life form, one that could mark not
> only an evolutionary breakthrough, but a potential threat to our survival as
> a species

This is exactly what's wrong with the press and peoples expectations about AI.
That single paragraph set the tone for the article to me, and know I'm totally
biased to thinking "this is just sensationalism media".

Edit: I expand a bit after reading, and totally agree with seiji's comment.

> But gradually it rises, and begins to stumble-run toward the goal. _You can
> almost see it gaining confidence_ , its legs moving beneath it, now picking
> up speed like a running back.

(emphasis is mine) No, it's not gaining confidence, it's just optimizing a
function. Despite what magical words have been used by those explaining to the
journalist the works of the algorithm, there robot doesn't feel or pursue
anything other than what it is being programmed to do: optimize an energy
function with respect to some parameters, which are set ahead of the training
sesion.

Like others commented, the journalistic quality of the article is on the low
end of the spectrum. I wonder how this made it to the front page. I began
reading expecting something of a certain quality, and that expectation was
certainly not met.

~~~
kingkawn
How are gaining confidence and optimizing a function not descriptions of the
same process expressed in different mediums?

~~~
dr_zoidberg
Confidence, in the sense that what used in the article (not as in the grade of
confidence in a probabilistic sample), has an emotional component. Optimizing
a function is adjusting the free parameters to maximize a desired output.

~~~
kingkawn
How is emotion not a feedback system for optimization other than the European
prejudice against taking it seriously?

~~~
adwn
Why should it be a "feedback system"? Maybe it is an unnecessary side effect
of our complicated brains?

For all we know, consciousness is a prerequisite for emotions, and I seriously
doubt that a simple optimization algorithm exhibits consciousness.

~~~
sgt101
There's no need to doubt - you can see the algorithm written down, there are
no symbols spent on consciousness. There are no surges in the network in
response to anything apart from the inputs. The sheep, it does not dream -
although sometimes I observe them writing on HN.

------
manaskarekar
Here's a much better commentary on AI for popcorn reading.

[http://waitbutwhy.com/2015/01/artificial-intelligence-
revolu...](http://waitbutwhy.com/2015/01/artificial-intelligence-
revolution-1.html)

------
tryitnow
I get nervous when tech trends start appearing in popular publications with
little history of covering tech. My spidey sense suggests that this signals an
approaching peak in the covered technology.

Frankly, I think the expectations around AI are outpacing the realities that
are attainable in the next 5-10 years. Now after that? Who knows. But I'm
starting to get the sense that a lot of people are going to be disappointed in
the next 5-10 years.

~~~
chadwittman
This is a really fascinating perspective. Thinking of publications based on
their probability of covering tech (based on past coverage) and subsequently
low probability publications covering tech more frequently, suggests evidence
of a "bubble". Love it!

------
eranation
Self driving car, image / voice recognition, or even getting the
classification / meaning of language texts is a far simpler task than a full
self-conscious AI, or even an AI that can simulate a conscious mind but not
really have one (e.g. a
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_zombie](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_zombie),
i.e. such an AI can talk about art all day, perhaps even create art and pass a
turing test, but it never "experienced" art). Were there any advances in
cognitive AI that justify all this "AI revolution" talk? didn't we simply get
really good at deep learning and better at image recognition / voice
recognition / language translation that is definitely laudable but still far
from the "Ex Machina" depiction?

~~~
chriswarbo
> Self driving car, image / voice recognition, or even getting the
> classification / meaning of language texts is a far simpler task than a full
> self-conscious AI, or even an AI that can simulate a conscious mind but not
> really have one

I disagree. Self-driving cars, image/voice recognition and
classification/meaning-extraction for text are well-defined problems, with
associated benchmarks, competitions, etc. These are hard problems.

On the other hand "full self-conscious AI" and "AI that can simulate a
conscious mind but not really have one" are collections of words whose main
reason for existence is to allow their user to keep redefining them
arbitrarily in order to win arguments (see, for example, John Searle).

I define "self-conscious" as being able to reason about onesself, where
"reason" means performing some nontrivial computation and "onesself" means the
pattern of information consitituting the agent (human, device, program, etc.).
Hence, I declare the multi-quines at
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quine_(computing)#Ouroboros_pr...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quine_\(computing\)#Ouroboros_programs)
as examples of "full self-conscious AI".

Further, I define "mind" as a computational process taking place in physical
matter, and a "conscious mind" as a mind capable of reason. Hence I declare
that the text "1 + 1" is an AI that can simulate a conscious mind (when given
to an interpreter like python) without really having one (since the text
performs no computation).

------
osteele
“Will robots inherit the earth? Yes, but they will be our children.” – Marvin
Minsky,
[http://web.media.mit.edu/~minsky/papers/sciam.inherit.html](http://web.media.mit.edu/~minsky/papers/sciam.inherit.html)

~~~
qbasic
And what do children do? They replace their parents. Is it possible that
robots will enter the fray of evolution and only time will tell if they are
more fit for survival.

------
swagtricker
Robots don't like to be anthropomorphized.

------
kyrre
replace the terms AI/DL with (non)linear regression. still hyped?

~~~
tariqali34
Entirely so. Non-linear regression sounds like a tool that can be used without
any ethical repercussions or philosophical angst about human obsolescence in
the face of machine capabilities. It also sounds like a tool that anyone can
use...either learn math or find a library that will do the (non)linear
regression for you. I mean, you already heard about linear regression in high
school, right? It doesn't sound as exotic as AI/DL either...

If the barriers to entry are low, then that means anyone can take advantage of
the __Power of Math __to do Great Things(tm). Said "Great Things(tm)" might
include humans trusting their models way too much and end up doing stupid
stuff as a result of them, but people have been misusing statistics for
generations and we haven't killed ourselves (yet).

------
n0us
I make a point of never visiting RollingStone for anything after they dragged
my school's name through the dirt without a second though to journalistic
integrity for the sole purpose of pursuing some agenda they had. Call me
biased but I refuse to believe that they are capable of producing anything of
quality and I would love to watch this magazine crash and burn.

~~~
proksoup
I would be interested in learning more about this, or their agenda, what
school or article is being referred to here?

~~~
Vaskivo
He's probably talking about the University of Virginia rape story ->
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Rape_on_Campus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Rape_on_Campus)
(wich was discredited)

