Nov 27, 2017

Superseding us in what way? The machine is already better at chess and Go, clearly not at classifying images[1], but the issue here is that the author argues that there is no such thing as a general intelligence. It's all situational.

On a separate note, does it even matter? Some people argue it's important so that we can put AI safe-guards in place, to protect mankind. But either:

A) Intelligence explosion won't happen and those safe-guards are not needed.

B) Intelligence explosion happens and the supersmart AI will easily find its way around feeble safe-guards put in place by the inferior humans.

While the end results are not the same; in either case the safe-guards are useless, though Asimov sure made a good story about them.


Nov 27, 2017

> He knew exactly what to say to the responding officer to cover his ass

Replacing human judgment with algorithms is a terrible idea for many reasons, but this might be the worst. Algorithms are deterministic, and thus they can be manipulated. "SEO" services exist in spite of Google's efforts to protect their ranking algorithm. Does anybody seriously believe their local government will be more successful than Google at preventing people (i.e. police, prosecutors, etc) from "optimizing" their input to the algorithm?

edit - justification for the claim that a bail algorithm would be easy to manipulate:

The recent single-pixel attack[1] against image classifiers.

Google's failure to recognize obviously inapropriate videos in their "youtube kids" app ("elsagate") (a good summary & discussion )

Nov 02, 2017

Very recently, it was found that changing a single, carefully placed, pixel is enough to confuse NN classifiers.

Oct 31, 2017

Extensive discussion:


    Paper identifier
    not recognized

    There appears to be a valid arXiv paper identifier
    within '1710.08864.pdfhttps:/'.  Perhaps
    the link you followed was intended as a link to