Artificial Intelligence – Insanely Complicated, Hopelessly Inadequate
The article is interesting in that it discusses the distinction between &quot;classical AI&quot; ( rule based ) versus modern AI ( ML ).<p>It gives example after example of how we repeatedly attempt to make classical AI work and it fails. The goal overall of the article seems to be to claim that ML is the correct path because hard logic based AI is too complex and will never work.<p>I think this is a bad view because it doesn&#x27;t acknowledge that both are necessary.<p>It is painfully obvious that humans have an internal dialog, and that the subconscious also engages in a sort of thought process involving tokens as well.<p>There are clearly many possibilities that we consider as people. These possibilities follow something close to logic but heavily influenced by notions that have been built through a non-logical process ( our &quot;beliefs&quot; )<p>What is hopelessly inadequate is pure neural networks and&#x2F;or trained ML. To ever approach anything similar to human thought we will have to use tokens.<p>Doing that is very difficult but not insanely so. Using the word insane implies that such a process is not guided by some predetermined logical system. I agree it is not fully logical, but not that it is insane.<p>The article is too dismissive of classical AI and seems to imply that those pursuing it are wasting our time.