This short by @darkcoffee8 shows just how smart a Trained #MOLE isn't, about basic, obvious, practical things;
https://loops.video/v/dTLXZ6XnBM
Even after burning billions in research funding, and thousand of tonnes of carbon emitted into the atmosphere;
The idea that this ludicrously expensive Artificial Stupidity generator will lead to genuinely intelligent computers, if we just shovel enough money and energy into the furnace, is itself contemptibly stupid.
@light
> it hasn't been trained on real-world practical things
True. But this is not one of the main things that make #MOLE Training a dead end as an approach to AI (if that's even its goal);
https://betterwithout.ai/backpropaganda#bricks-fly
> Maybe this will change when robot bodies get good
This was the main theory behind Heideggerian AI in the 1980s;
https://leidlmair.at/doc/whyheideggerianaifailed.pdf
But any approach to AI based on embodiment would be qualitatively and fundamentally different from MOLE Training
"... what we have learned from our experience of finding our way around in a city is sedimented in how that city looks to us. Merleau-Ponty calls this feedback loop between the embodied agent and the perceptual world the intentional arc. He says: 'Cognitive life, the life of desire or perceptual life – is subtended by an ‘intentional arc’ which projects round about us our past, our future, [and] our human setting'."
#HubertDreyfuss, 2007
Strypey
Light