• Grimy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    18 hours ago

    No, it shows how certain people misunderstand the meaning of the word.

    You have called npcs in video games “AI” for a decade, yet you were never implying they were somehow intelligent. The whole argument is strangely inconsistent.

    • Clent@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Intellegence has a very clear definition.

      It’s requires the ability to acquire knowledge, understand knowledge and use knowledge.

      No one has been able to create an system that can understand knowledge, therefor me none of it is artificial intelligence. Each generation is merely more and more complex knowledge models. Useful in many ways but never intelligent.

      • 8uurg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        37 minutes ago

        Wouldn’t the algorithm that creates these models in the first place fit the bill? Given that it takes a bunch of text data, and manages to organize this in such a fashion that the resulting model can combine knowledge from pieces of text, I would argue so.

        What is understanding knowledge anyways? Wouldn’t humans not fit the bill either, given that for most of our knowledge we do not know why it is the way it is, or even had rules that were - in hindsight - incorrect?

        If a model is more capable of solving a problem than an average human being, isn’t it, in its own way, some form of intelligent? And, to take things to the utter extreme, wouldn’t evolution itself be intelligent, given that it causes intelligent behavior to emerge, for example, viruses adapting to external threats? What about an (iterative) optimization algorithm that finds solutions that no human would be able to find?

        Intellegence has a very clear definition.

        I would disagree, it is probably one of the most hard to define things out there, which has changed greatly with time, and is core to the study of philosophy. Every time a being or thing fits a definition of intelligent, the definition often altered to exclude, as has been done many times.

    • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      18 hours ago

      Who is “you”?

      Just because some dummies supposedly think that NPCs are “AI”, that doesn’t make it so. I don’t consider checkers to be a litmus test for “intelligence”.

      • Grimy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        17 hours ago

        “You” applies to anyone that doesnt understand what AI means. It’s a portmanteau word for a lot of things.

        Npcs ARE AI. AI doesnt mean “human level intelligence” and never did. Read the wiki if you need help understanding.