Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

If you accept that a branch-and-bound chess AI can be creative, do you think that a brute force chess AI, given sufficient time, can be creative? If you do, we simply don't have a definition of creativity in common and that's where the discussion should be headed, and if you don't, then I don't understand what's the point of your example.

My position on the subject is very simple, chess players are assigning meaning and intentions to the chess solution that the machine doesn't understand. A branch and bound search isn't AI, even when you use a neural network to skip a few depths. Just because a human finds it creative doesn't mean that the process actually was.

Humans fundamentally don't and can't use simple vector learning with the input vector being real world data, because humans use metacognition to come up with representations and models even before data for which it is useful exists.

Again, there's no metaphysics here. The most abstract tool I'm using here is that of a concept/idea, and it's not metaphysical at all, it can be understood as a tangible mental pattern. Unlike LLMs, we can create and understand patterns without needing to having seen them anywhere. It's a fundamental difference.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: