It doesn’t have to be cutting edge or even progress to be AI, how did you get that idea? Obviously Anthropic and OpenAI have cutting edge AI, they are considered the global leaders, even if they go bankrupt in a few months.
I think you are confusing AI with AGI or strong AI.
There is not 1 single way to make an AI, and there are HUGE differences in how good they are, but very very definitely we have had AI since the 80’s. Back then it just wasn’t really usable, that began to a very small degree in the 90’s, with for instance expert systems.
we call it ai when its at the frontier of how close we’re getting to ai. cultural convention.
this shit isn’t and never was.
we also call stuff that is parts of what would be an agi theoretically if we ever build one, kinds of narrow reasoning and the like. this shit isn’t and never will be.
No we don’t, no such definition exist, you clearly don’t know what AI even means. You probably also don’t know what intelligence means. But that’s OK many people don’t.
You clearly didn’t bother educating yourself, either with the link I sent, or looking it up for yourself.
Artificial intelligence (AI) is the capability of computational systems to perform tasks typically associated with human intelligence, such as learning, reasoning, problem-solving, perception, and decision-making.
Artificial general intelligence (AGI) is a hypothetical type of artificial intelligence that matches or surpasses human capabilities
There’s a huge difference between the 2, having some abilities associated with human intelligence, and matching or surpassing are 2 very different things.
Also notice that the Strong AI remains hypothetical, while AI does not because we already have an abundance of that.
There is no historic term that is as you describe, except maybe if you go back to ancient Greek philosophy. But even within philosophy the words are used as I described.
You are making shit up, because you claimed that’s how “we” use it. In current tense.
I hope you learned something, because your claim was way way off any definition.
oh shiiiiiiiiit you’ve parsed out the literal meaning of the exact words I said to rules lawyer your way into explaining what I meant to me! I think you win at ‘communication’.
It doesn’t have to be cutting edge or even progress to be AI, how did you get that idea? Obviously Anthropic and OpenAI have cutting edge AI, they are considered the global leaders, even if they go bankrupt in a few months.
I think you are confusing AI with AGI or strong AI.
There is not 1 single way to make an AI, and there are HUGE differences in how good they are, but very very definitely we have had AI since the 80’s. Back then it just wasn’t really usable, that began to a very small degree in the 90’s, with for instance expert systems.
Maybe read this to become better informed:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_artificial_intelligence
we call it ai when its at the frontier of how close we’re getting to ai. cultural convention.
this shit isn’t and never was.
we also call stuff that is parts of what would be an agi theoretically if we ever build one, kinds of narrow reasoning and the like. this shit isn’t and never will be.
No we don’t, no such definition exist, you clearly don’t know what AI even means. You probably also don’t know what intelligence means. But that’s OK many people don’t.
You clearly didn’t bother educating yourself, either with the link I sent, or looking it up for yourself.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligence
But you probably don’t understand it, and conflate it with strong AI:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_general_intelligence
There’s a huge difference between the 2, having some abilities associated with human intelligence, and matching or surpassing are 2 very different things.
Also notice that the Strong AI remains hypothetical, while AI does not because we already have an abundance of that.
I’m talking about how the term has historically been used, not dictionaries. I’m not going to argue about what’s in the dictionary.
There is no historic term that is as you describe, except maybe if you go back to ancient Greek philosophy. But even within philosophy the words are used as I described.
You are making shit up, because you claimed that’s how “we” use it. In current tense.
I hope you learned something, because your claim was way way off any definition.
oh shiiiiiiiiit you’ve parsed out the literal meaning of the exact words I said to rules lawyer your way into explaining what I meant to me! I think you win at ‘communication’.