Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<sLCtG2.1vJ5@kithrup.com> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.fandom Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!news-vm.kithrup.com!kithrup.com!djheydt From: djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) Subject: Re: AI isn't Message-ID: <sLCtG2.1vJ5@kithrup.com> Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2024 16:21:38 GMT References: <lomggjdgr9uo147ijjh6kr3bhikg6hgfis@4ax.com> <vea3a7$3c88g$1@epsilon3.eternal-september.org> <vea9el$hvu$1@reader1.panix.com> <vei8di$12ono$1@dont-email.me> Organization: Kithrup Enterprises, Ltd. X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010) Bytes: 1443 Lines: 20 In article <vei8di$12ono$1@dont-email.me>, Mike Van Pelt <usenet@mikevanpelt.com> wrote: >In article <vea9el$hvu$1@reader1.panix.com>, >Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote: >>Am I the only one here who is annoyed by the use of "AI" to mean >>anything other than human-level (or better) machine intelligence? > >(raises hand) > >I'd settle for 70-ish IQ intelligence. > >What the marketroids are pleased to call "Artificial >Intelligence" is not intelligence of any kind, just pattern >matching. (With amusing results where it breaks down >and includes nonexistent scientific references or legal >citations.) I've been lobbying for everyone to call it >"Simulated Intelligence", but not gotten much traction. [Hal Heydt] Dorothy's--and my--usual snark about anything claiming the be "AI" is that it was mostly "A" and very little "I".