Human AI is Decades Away, But We Need to Start the Debate Now | Demis Hassabis | Google Zeitgeist

You and the person's comment above you are missing the point. First watch : ▶ this video (A.I and physics) are quite related and workable ^I reference the above video not because I watched it and thought (hey that makes sense). I reference it because I already felt the same in my work on A.I and felt (wow someone else gets it) Also : [link] It's good to keep all sorts of working ideas/knowledge in your head when you're working towards solving a problem. All the physics experiments in the world aren't going to give you insight into problems unless you have workable ideas for how to integrate the findings into understanding/knowledge. What people often error in is that you can keep hacking away at and brute force your way to knowledge/understanding ... “A theory can be proved by experiment; but no path leads from experiment to the birth of a theory.” — Albert Einstein Ancient philosophers solved a lot of problems. More than you seem to be giving credit to. It's from their ideas that people knew where to look to 'prove' things. Watch the Feynman video and truly grasp what he is saying.

in “Visions of Future Physics” · View on HN

I find it really interesting that Goal 4 is a game playing agent. Deepmind has been focussing on this since the beginning[0] and actually has great progress as far as Atari games go[1]. And DeepMind is able to use a single agent rather than a different specific one for each game. I wonder if OpenAI wants to go in a different direction although RL has considerable success. Whereas the other goals definitely need a lot of work before they are "real-world" functional, especially Goal 3. But of course that depends on their definition of 'useful'. [0]: ▶ this video [1]: [link]

in “OpenAI technical goals” · View on HN

I really liked Jeff Atwoods explanation [0], and the DeepMinds CEO talk referenced in his post [1] [0] [link] [1] ▶ this video

in “Why AlphaGo Is Such a Big Deal” · View on HN