The ML described is basically pattern recognition.
Maybe, really good pattern recognition could produce a complete set of rules and logic. But it’s complex and unclear what the above means.
You think AI are tools and can’t have the capabilities that produce X-risk. Instead of investigating this, you pack this belief into definition of the word “symbolic” and seize on people not fully engaging with this concept. Untangling this with you seems laborious and unpromising.
I don’t really understand your comment, but I’d like to point out that I didn’t invent the “symbolic” idea. Leading people on both sides (LeCun, Bengio, Marcus) agree that some form of symbolic reasoning is necessary. It IS a very complex problem I agree, and I encourage everyone to engage with it as the top researchers in the field already have.
The ML described is basically pattern recognition.
Maybe, really good pattern recognition could produce a complete set of rules and logic. But it’s complex and unclear what the above means.
You think AI are tools and can’t have the capabilities that produce X-risk. Instead of investigating this, you pack this belief into definition of the word “symbolic” and seize on people not fully engaging with this concept. Untangling this with you seems laborious and unpromising.
I don’t really understand your comment, but I’d like to point out that I didn’t invent the “symbolic” idea. Leading people on both sides (LeCun, Bengio, Marcus) agree that some form of symbolic reasoning is necessary. It IS a very complex problem I agree, and I encourage everyone to engage with it as the top researchers in the field already have.