Squilliam said:
scottie said:
ramses01 said:
I don't have time to do your searches for you. Just find his post E3 interviews. He clearly states that the whole point of Milo is to give the illusion of AI, which it does awesomely.
|
I don't think anyone is claiming Milo as actual artificial intelligence. We have thousands of our handsomest computer scientists working on creating even rudimentary artificial intelligence - it'd be rather embarresing for them if a group of video game devs got there first :P
Those who believe in the Milo demonstration would refer to it as an illusion of AI. Those who don't believe in the demonstration claim that Milo's actions were preprogrammed completely, and that he was not responding to the woman at all - she merely knew what he was programmed to say and could thus could act so as to make it look like he was responding to her
|
Actually she wasn't told what to say, and Milo responded similarly to the Digital Foundry people when they described the demo. Personally im not sure what category I would place Milo into.
|
I'm not defending or attacking either belief - I'm waiting to hear more from MS at the next E3. I was just pointing out that Milo is, at best, what those in the industry refer to as 'narrow', 'weak' or 'applied' ai, in which the software follows a series of instructions given to it by its programmers in order to simulate consciousness and intelligence, as opposed to actually possessing either of these traits (strong ai, which no-one has actually created yet btw), and that could well be what Molyneaux meant when he said
“You’ve got to remember that we’re not creating a piece of academic research; Milo can’t actually think – we’re just making the illusion that he can,” he said.
