You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

gilch comments on Open Thread, January 4-10, 2016 - Less Wrong Discussion

5 Post author: polymathwannabe 04 January 2016 01:06PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (430)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: gilch 05 January 2016 07:24:20PM *  0 points [-]

It's not a "narrow AI"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weak_AI It is by that definition. Of course, words are only useful if people understand them. I know LW has some non-standard terminology. Point me to the definitions agreed upon by this community and I'll update accordingly.

A voting sockpuppet doesn't post except to get the initial karma.

Sounds like the initial karma threshold is too low. I have various other ideas about how to fix the karma system, but perhaps I should hold off on proposing (more) solutions before we've discussed the problem thoroughly. If that's already been started I should probably continue from there, otherwise, do you think this issue (karma problems) merits a top-level discussion post?

Comment author: Lumifer 05 January 2016 08:12:18PM -2 points [-]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weak_AI It is by that definition.

I still don't think so. "AI" is a very fuzzy term (the meaning of which changes with time, too) but in this case what you have is a fairly plain-vanilla classifier which I see no reason to anoint with the "intelligence" title.

do you think this issue (karma problems) merits a top-level discussion post?

Karma has been extensively (and fruitlessly) talked about here. If you want to write a top-level post about your proposals, it might be a good idea to acquaint yourself with the previous discussions here (as well as the experience of other forums, from Slashdot to Reddit).