Talk:Artificial intelligence

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
August 6, 2009Peer reviewReviewed

A little light relief[edit]

We're all doomed! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-30290540

Artificial Intelligence Defination[edit]

The machine can generate emphasizes of inferences logically & independently at very high speed its called Artificial Intelligence. It can be utilizing in everywhere & every industries with all subjects matter like Physics, Image, Voice, Mathematics, Healthcare Drug Developments, Machine design etc. generate accurate predictions to final outcomes of your projects/production. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kpshah234 (talkcontribs) 10:04, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Nope, the speed of inference has very little to do with artificial intelligence. Jeblad (talk) 12:17, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

overlooked randomness[edit]

could someone possibly add some thoughts on how randomness is needed for ml/ai in the general sense people would expect? https://ai.stackexchange.com/questions/15590/is-randomness-necessary-for-ai?newreg=70448b7751cd4731b79234915d4a1248

i wish i could do it, but i lack the expertise or the time to bring this up in Wikipedia style, as it is evident by this very post and the chain of links in it, if you care enough to dig.

cheers! 😁😘 16:12, 27 February 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cregox (talkcontribs)

Philosophy and Ethics section needs to be unbiased[edit]

This article needs unbiased viewpoints in the Philosophy and Ethics section from people who do not have a stake in this technology. A reference needed to understand the section's bias towards the technology is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_technology#Technology_and_neutrality. If possible, a sub-section on SCOT is needed to neutralize the viewpoint. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:908:4F5:AAE0:40A8:33D9:1160:CF3F (talk) 01:30, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

I have added an intro to the section based on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_technology#Technology_and_neutrality. I did not address SCOT but will try to elaborate on it shortly. Johncdraper (talk) 10:58, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
Added mention of SCOT. What has to happen next is a review of the whole section to check for bias re technophilia. I'll look at this after the pending edits are accepted. Johncdraper (talk) 11:11, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
I accepted the edit in the pending review process per the very low bar of the pending review criteria. This is not an endorsement of the edit nor acceptance as a fellow editor. Others should review. North8000 (talk) 13:12, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
Johncdraper I can't find any strong sources for "social construction of artificial intelligence" per se; I don't think this has strong enough sources for inclusion in this article. Rolf H Nelson (talk) 20:02, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Rolf H Nelson What do you consider a "strong enough source"? How do you decide whether a source is "strong" or "weak"? I just want to know. Please do not take it otherwise :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:908:4F5:AAE0:AC3F:CDDD:F27C:AE6F (talk) 00:32, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Rolf H Nelson I have sympathies for SCOT having application here, but you are right; there are not that many explicit secondary sources. So, there is one strong (relatively early) source for SCOT as applied to AI. This is [1]. Then, there is Collins, the final chapter in [2], looks at AI (expert systems and the science of knowledge). In terms of articles, [3] and [4], as well as [5] seem relevant. Then, I feel that many, such as Baum, e.g., in [6], without mentioning social construction, are taking a SCOT position to the AI community itself; he discusses social context and meaning and social norms. Cave et al. here [7] are also adopting a SCOT perspective to AI, without mentioning it. Your opinion on whether any of this could support an introductory para (maybe rewritten) on SCOT as applied to AI is welcome. Johncdraper (talk) 09:50, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
WP:RS is the official guideline. Different editors have different thresholds, but for a summary article like this that's already around max reasonable length, the threshold for getting consensus on adding controversial new material is likely to be high. Rolf H Nelson (talk) 02:33, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Forsythe, Diana. (2001). Studying those who study us : an anthropologist in the world of artificial intelligence. Stanford Univ. Press. ISBN 0-8047-4141-7. OCLC 231881193.
  2. ^ Bijker, Wiebe E., editor. Hughes, Thomas Parke, editor. Pinch, Trevor, 1952- editor. The social construction of technological systems : new directions in the sociology and history of technology. ISBN 978-0-262-51760-7. OCLC 759491749.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  3. ^ Oravec, Jo Ann (2018-08-24). "Artificial Intelligence, Automation, and Social Welfare: Some Ethical and Historical Perspectives on Technological Overstatement and Hyperbole". Ethics and Social Welfare. 13 (1): 18–32. doi:10.1080/17496535.2018.1512142. ISSN 1749-6535.
  4. ^ Bailey, Diane E.; Barley, Stephen R. (2019-12). "Beyond design and use: How scholars should study intelligent technologies". Information and Organization: 100286. doi:10.1016/j.infoandorg.2019.100286. ISSN 1471-7727. Check date values in: |date= (help)
  5. ^ Selbst, Andrew D.; Boyd, Danah; Friedler, Sorelle A.; Venkatasubramanian, Suresh; Vertesi, Janet (2019). "Fairness and Abstraction in Sociotechnical Systems". Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency - FAT* '19. New York, New York, USA: ACM Press. doi:10.1145/3287560.3287598. ISBN 978-1-4503-6125-5.
  6. ^ Baum, Seth D. (2016-09-28). "On the promotion of safe and socially beneficial artificial intelligence". AI & SOCIETY. 32 (4): 543–551. doi:10.1007/s00146-016-0677-0. ISSN 0951-5666.
  7. ^ Cave, Stephen, editor. Dihal, Kanta, editor. Dillon, Sarah, editor. (2020). AI Narratives : a history of imaginative thinking about intelligent machines. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-884666-5. OCLC 1121288075.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

Relationship of AI to mathematics[edit]

  • Artificial Intelligence has nothing to do with mathematical theories. Instead, mathematical theorems are misused to proof that AI is impossible.[1]
  • AI is different from turing machines [2]
  • Artificial intelligence is located in cognitive science not in natural science
Literature
  • [1] Sloman, Aaron. The irrelevance of Turing machines to artificial intelligence. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass, 2002.
  • [2] Wang, Pei. "Three fundamental misconceptions of artificial intelligence." Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 19.3 (2007): 249-268.

--ManuelRodriguez (talk) 06:23, 1 April 2020 (UTC)