[ExI] Interesting take on AI.

[Kelly Anderson]

Brook's main point seems to actually be that narrow AI, or just good
programming, can beat more generalized AI at specific tasks like
running a warehouse. I look at my daily work automating woodworking
tasks and see that my specialized machines are MUCH better at doing
what they need to do than any humanoid robot could accomplish without
such specialized tools. If the humanoid robots were smart enough to
build automated systems, then my point fails, but a humanoid robot
working with a router table just isn't going to compete with an
assembly line approach in any way shape or form. In this narrow sense
of course he is correct.

But... There are more generalized tasks, such as maintaining a
household that would be suitable for intelligent robotics.

-Kelly

On Sun, Jun 30, 2024 at 9:57 AM efc--- via extropy-chat
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> Thought you might enjoy this take on AI:
>
> https://techcrunch.com/2024/06/29/mit-robotics-pioneer-rodney-brooks-thinks-people-are-vastly-overestimating-generative-ai/
>
> "Brooks adds that there’s this mistaken belief, mostly thanks to Moore’s
> law, that there will always be exponential growth when it comes to
> technology — the idea that if ChatGPT 4 is this good, imagine what ChatGPT
> 5, 6 and 7 will be like. He sees this flaw in that logic, that tech
> doesn’t always grow exponentially, in spite of Moore’s law".
>
> More in the article above.
>
> Best regards,
> Daniel
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat