Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
posted by Dopefish on Sunday February 23 2014, @12:00AM   Printer-friendly
from the knowledge-is-power dept.
dyslexic writes "An Equation For Intelligence? It is something like the philosopher's stone. A sort of E=mc2 that would put intelligence, and more particularly artificial intelligence, on a sound theoretical footing. But could it be as simple as this TED talk video (available on the link in addition to the article) suggests? The video explains some of this and provides examples of the principle in action where it is claimed to replicate a number of "human-like" intelligent behaviors including cooperation and tool use."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday February 23 2014, @01:34AM

    by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Sunday February 23 2014, @01:34AM (#5033) Homepage

    To add to your skepticism, it sounds like an oversimplification of an all-encompassing and nebulous subject from a monotonous nerd's perspective, referring to the narrow case of board games and using thermodynamics and information theory as inspiration. The irony is that he says that intelligence and maximizing options go hand-in-hand, while he is explaining using few options with his narrow point of view. What would you say about somebody who was intelligent but set in their ways and didn't like being presented with options?

    Kinda like Freud, who was one smart motherfucker but (in my opinion) had a tendency to project his own psyche a little too much into what was also a complex and nebulous subject.


    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=3, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2014, @12:35PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2014, @12:35PM (#5165)

    Freud made fictitious case histories. There is no science to back up anything he ever wrote. It was an injustice the way that schizophrenia was blamed on bad mothering and women were made to feel guilty for their child's mental illness. You can't say that no one knew any better - biological psychiatrists certainly did know better for a long time. Freud was a charlatan.