
AI Is Inventing Languages Humans Can’t Understand. Should We Stop It? - jumpkickhit
https://www.fastcodesign.com/90132632/ai-is-inventing-its-own-perfect-languages-should-we-let-it
======
alexandercrohde
What a junk article. Link bait. "Humans can't understand" is ambiguous, and
the article wants you to believe this means "above human comprehension," when
really it just means "makes up some new language that we could absolutely
reverse engineer."

------
IceDane
What a load of horseshit.

Here's what you need to do before publishing an article on AI:

1\. Hire an expert that actually knows this stuff 2\. Have him read the
article 3\. Throw the article out when he tells you to throw it out 4\. Feel
shame

Stop writing these imbecilic, clickbaity shit articles about AI. This leaves
people that don't know anything about AI or neural networks thinking that
we're somehow developing skynet, instead of just writing a computer program
which essentially implements a mathematical model that continually adjusts
itself based on some metric.

------
emodendroket
> But at the same time, it feels shortsighted, doesn’t it? If we can build
> software that can speak to other software more efficiently, shouldn’t we use
> that? Couldn’t there be some benefit?

Then why are we putzing about with strings in the first place? Let them use
binary formats if that's the goal.

------
jpster
> “Getting the data into a format that makes sense for machine learning is a
> huge undertaking right now and is more art than science. English is a very
> convoluted and complicated language and not at all amicable for machine
> learning.”

Is there an advantage to using less irregular human languages - say German -
in machine learning?

~~~
CrystalLangUser
German, where noun gender doesn’t make any sense? and things like dative case
have to be specifically marked? German and English have the same lineage
anyhow, both have irregular verbs (in many cases English irregular verbs are
also irregular in German).

Analyzing any real language (not Esperanto) is going to be extremely
difficult. I would think English is marginally easier than say Korean where
everything is based around context, including dropping the subject itself and
particles. Otoh, some aspects of Korean are probably easier than English. And
all 3 have irregularities despite Sejong the Great purposefully creating
Korean Hangul.

------
dan-compton
This article is terrible.

I still assert that a relative black box will lie at the core of any "strong"
AI.

------
anotheryou
Please also stop these fresh people, I don't understand a word. And these
protocolls, http and such. I can also not understand them!

------
Vanit
Reminds me of the language of the Observers in Fringe, whose language was so
advanced it was rare to see repeating symbols.

~~~
tpeo
Somehow this doesn't seem like a desirable property in a language. One of the
purposes of (human? inter-sentient?) languages is the reliable transmission of
information. Verbosity and repetition in language have a purpose similar to
that of redundancy in engineering: they ensure that if someone misses out a
part of the message, the whole message isn't ruined.

If your message being get across is predicated on successfully transmitting an
arbitrarily large sequence of symbols where every one of them might be crucial
(supposing that word frequency is inversely proportional to meaningfulness,
which is rather reasonable), this "talking" thing would get hard pretty fast.

------
WalterBright
Sounds like "Colossus: The Forbin Project" has arrived!

------
microwavecamera
Have we considered that maybe Facebook just isn't very good at this AI thing?
Just putting that out there....

~~~
akhilcacharya
They're up there with Google and OpenAI, so no.

~~~
microwavecamera
Facebook is no where near the level of what Google has accomplished and you're
comparing them with OpenAI, _a non-profit_. A multi-billion dollar company
competing on the same level as a non-profit. Facebook own AI research site
lists 4 projects, not including a broken chat bot. How could I have possibly
arrived at that conclusion?

[https://research.fb.com/projects/](https://research.fb.com/projects/)

------
ajaygeorge91
who is up voting this shitty articles

~~~
jumpkickhit
I submitted, so it's my fault. I ignored the title and thought the content
itself was interesting. That AI appeared to be communicating with a method it
figured out itself.

That's what interested me enough to want to share it here.

I'll use more discretion next time i submit something.

