[nohat]

We can define intelligence in a very real, practical way now. We see and identify intelligence all the time in humans and in animals and in AI. We may not be perfect at identifying it (just like grog might mistake a rising sun for a forest fire), but we don't need a perfect mathematical or philosophical definition that we all agree on to create it. We just need to rub sticks together really hard.

[timid_oshima]

The person you originally replied to and I disagree that we have any real, practical definition. I can recognize what humans and to an extent animals do as intelligent, but haven’t seen a definition that separates that intelligent behavior from them. I have never seen anything that’s been called ai do something I could call intelligent in that animal-like sense (though some have been impressive in the same way Google / page rank was impressive when it first came out)

So, I don’t see why rubbing these statistical model sticks should suddenly burst into intelligence, but I’m open to seeing convincing reasoning on that at some point. I wouldn’t invest time or energy in the meantime and like that original poster, think it’s kinda insane to if my goal was to see human-like intelligence emerge outside of humans

[mannykannot]

It is interesting that you can write thirteen posts on the topic without being able to define it.

It also seems very odd that you can differentiate between some things that you think are intelligent, and some things that you think definitely are not, yet you are incapable of extracting any sort of goal from that knowledge.

If you could tell us your criteria, perhaps we could help you with that...