Those are ultimately kludges and bandaids. It will be a perpetual band-aiding exercise. See this famous "Panda" example of how NNs don't actually identify objects mentioned in this article towardsdatascience.com/…
As long as NN is there it's going to be a kludge. NNs don't belong in a system involving any kind of legitimate epistemology; Their presence de-legitimizes knowledge claims.
NNs as a technology is a distraction that's holding back AI development as a whole
That's handwaving. We don't have to look any further than "autonomous driving" to see how the talk of "perfection" doesn't apply. Heck, Gary talked about this in his last article https://garymarcus.substack.com/p/the-second-worst-100b-investment $100B of "better" and it's still in the water.
Those are ultimately kludges and bandaids. It will be a perpetual band-aiding exercise. See this famous "Panda" example of how NNs don't actually identify objects mentioned in this article https://towardsdatascience.com/fooling-neural-networks-with-adversarial-examples-8afd36258a03
As long as NN is there it's going to be a kludge. NNs don't belong in a system involving any kind of legitimate epistemology; Their presence de-legitimizes knowledge claims.
NNs as a technology is a distraction that's holding back AI development as a whole
Sunken cost fallacy. No, I'm not the one standing on the wrong side of "ideology" here. https://aeon.co/essays/your-brain-does-not-process-information-and-it-is-not-a-computer https://www.theguardian.com/science/2020/feb/27/why-your-brain-is-not-a-computer-neuroscience-neural-networks-consciousness
That's handwaving. We don't have to look any further than "autonomous driving" to see how the talk of "perfection" doesn't apply. Heck, Gary talked about this in his last article https://garymarcus.substack.com/p/the-second-worst-100b-investment $100B of "better" and it's still in the water.