Difference between revisions of "Talk:2451: AI Methodology"
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
I think it’s interesting that no one has thought to define AI, as if everybody should know what this means! | I think it’s interesting that no one has thought to define AI, as if everybody should know what this means! | ||
| + | |||
| + | I think the first paragraph (“The joke is...”) is not justified. Too many details that cannot be inferred from the comic, even using AI. | ||
Revision as of 20:27, 17 April 2021
I checked with severαl bots, & replαcing eαch instαnce of "a" with "α" in α mid-length pαssαge of text seems enough to sαtisfy most unicity requirements.
- But then the spell-checkers (AI-based or not) start screaming about the unknown words. Nutster (talk) 09:14, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
An alternate explanation would be the AI's have reached Singularity and are conspiring to say that all work, as a conscious effort, despite the quality of data. "Don't worry; be happy." Nutster (talk) 09:14, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
- I think it's a spoof of the recent reports of things like facial recognition systems that have trouble with minorities. Or Google/YouTube recommendation algorithms that show the user sites that confirm their biases. Barmar (talk) 12:59, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
i think the methodology ai is dodgy and has inbuilt preferences to pick other ai options over others, regardless of their validity. kinda like ai nepotism
I think it’s interesting that no one has thought to define AI, as if everybody should know what this means!
I think the first paragraph (“The joke is...”) is not justified. Too many details that cannot be inferred from the comic, even using AI.
