> It seems like when it comes to AI advances, there's always a shifting of goalposts as soon as an AI is able to do a task that was once thought to be a defining characteristic of human cognition.
Usually it's because people all over the discussion fail to correctly distinguish between generally adaptive intelligence and specifically engineered "intelligence" (tool that appears to perform a task intelligently), and also between conscious and unaware mechanical intelligence.
A Go or Chess program isn't a goalpost for generally adaptive intelligence, it's a milestone for specifically engineered intelligence. And it isn't conscious, which is the writer's point, though the expression is imprecise enough it could be misunderstood as criticizing the more specific form.
Usually it's because people all over the discussion fail to correctly distinguish between generally adaptive intelligence and specifically engineered "intelligence" (tool that appears to perform a task intelligently), and also between conscious and unaware mechanical intelligence.
A Go or Chess program isn't a goalpost for generally adaptive intelligence, it's a milestone for specifically engineered intelligence. And it isn't conscious, which is the writer's point, though the expression is imprecise enough it could be misunderstood as criticizing the more specific form.