Maybe we shouldn't have called it AI

by Gene Michael Stover

created Sunday, 2021 November 14
updated Sunday, 2021 November 21

Problems with AI

Problems with the term “artificial intelligence” include...

• “The definition of intelligence is controversial”.[00] Right off the bat, when you use the term “artificial intelligence”, you've invited a debate. Unless what you want is to debate the definition of intelligence, that debate will take time & energy from whatever you really did want to discuss (such as recent successes, failures, or implementation questions that haven't been solved yet).
• If you mention the intelligence of a program or other machine, you've opened the door for someone else to argue about whether a machine can be intelligent. As with the previous point, unless this is what you wanted to debate, it's a waste of time & energy.[01]
• Someone will invariably point out that whatever A.I. technique you want to discuss isn't how brains work. Again, we're now in time-sucking debate territory that detracts from the interesting topic you wanted to discuss.
• “Artificial intelligence” inspires wariness in some people, making it difficult for them to grok whatever point you're trying to make
• “Artificial intelligence” inspires ethical questions in some people, making it difficult for them to grok whatever actually interesting point you're trying to make
• We probably don't even have an agreed set of requirements that many of us would agree is intelligent (even if you discount the people who question whether a machine can be intelligent at all). So again, why waste time with the debate that'll probably follow?

These problems with the term “artificial intelligence” apply to its predecessor “cognitive simulation” & probably other predecessors I'm not aware of.

“Machine learning” has the same problems. In addition, it's often considered a subset of A.I., so it wouldn't be an appropriate replacement.

Instead of AI

Do you even give a fuck whether it's intelligent, or do we just want & need software that solves hard problems that we didn't program it to solve explicitly?

Instead of “artificial intelligence”, maybe we should use a term that's more indisputably descriptive.

Seems that a descriptive term might be “flexible, expandable, & resilient” systems. It's not catchy, & the abbreviation is F.E.A.R., which doesn't help against the worried & ethically concerned people.

Someone needs to come up with a descriptive, indisputable, & catchy term to replace A.I.

And for gods's sakes, let's stop suggesting that an automaton is or will be intelligent. It distracts from the important parts.[03]

Notes

00. definition is controversial

wikipedia:///Intelligence#Definitions

01. philosophical debates

By the way, very smart people have debated these ideas for thousands of years without finding solid answers. So you won't find a solid answer, either. And even if you do (and you won't), the next step will be for lawyers, artists, & the rest of civilization to take it to the next step. Your individual word won't count for much. And like I said, you won't solve the philosophical question anyway. So unless you want to debate it because you enjoy debating it, don't bother. (And few of us — including you & me — know shit about debating, so don't bother to debate anything at all. It's a waste of time.)

03. a final thought

I would not be surprised if the term “intelligence” limits how we think of the problem & its solutions. If we jetisoned the word from practitioners's associations with the systems they are trying to build, wouldn't that allow them to imagine more possible solutions. That jetisoning could take a full generation or 2.

Change Log

cybertiggyr.com