Not sure if this is the best community to post in; please let me know if there’s a more appropriate one. AFAIK [email protected] is meant for news and articles only.

  • CovfefeKills
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Again, if you could articulate how knowing the names of the people who developed this stuff is going to change anything about what you are doing here I would be happy to google a history lesson for you.

    E: See it from my perspective. You are not angry because of anything that I can change, you are just angry. So how could proving anything to you change why you are angry? That’s the game you are playing. And I am here to play with you.

    • NotASharkInAManSuitBanned from community
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’m not angry, dummy, I literally just asked you to provide proof of your claims. Nice try, though.

      • CovfefeKills
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I thought you were angry because you were dumb, but you are dumb because you are angry. (reply to the other comment dont tree this shit lol)

        • NotASharkInAManSuitBanned from community
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          So, you don’t understand any part of this conversation, do you?

    • NotASharkInAManSuitBanned from community
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      I was asking specifically where they gave the outline of “anything that runs on a neural network,” which was your claim that you then pinned upon the Dartmouth group. Where did you find them referring to such as a definition of AI?

      You have not clarified or outlined anything regarding that claim. You have called me stupid for asking and implied I know nothing of Turing, McCarthy, Claude Shannon, Rochester, etc…, or their works, because you’re an arrogant ass who thinks you’re the only person capable of reading or taking an interest in the history and growth of technology and computers for some reason. Then you called me an idiot because you can’t provide proof of your claims, and you’re also an asshole.

      Sources, or fuck off, you god damned child.

      • CovfefeKills
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        So wait this whole time you are just mad about semantics?

        JFC dude you want scientific explanations for why we used words where shut the actual fuck up lol

        • NotASharkInAManSuitBanned from community
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Yes, this is a computing science subject, you were making a large claim on a subject of computer science, you were making a computer science claim, where in the field of computer science was it stated that AI is “anything that runs on a neural network”?

          Give me a quote. I don’t need a scientific article. Just give me verifiable proof of that claim. I’m not mad, buddy, just very curious and thirsty for answers.

        • NotASharkInAManSuitBanned from community
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Again, not mad, and not semantics. Where was it claimed by McCarthy or the folks that worked with him that AI is “anything running on a neural network”? That was your claim, why do you claim that? Where was that ever said by any of those folks? That was your claim, back it up or suck it up.

          • CovfefeKills
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            You are trying to get me to give you sources of the semantics of the term AI. That is literally what you are doing.

            I think I realized your problem, what you need is the definition of the individual parts so you can grasp the concept “AI” semantically.

            adjective: artificial

            1. made or produced by human beings rather than occurring naturally, especially as a copy of something natural.  "her skin glowed in the artificial light"
            

            noun: intelligence

            1. the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills. "an eminent man of great intelligence"
            

            AI by definition can be really mundane and limited it doesn’t have to satisfy your idea of it you got in your head from movies and tv.

                  • CovfefeKills
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    2 days ago

                    No no I took up the mantle, but you took the trouble to copy and paste and didn’t realize we are different people. And you are an insufferable idiot.

            • NotASharkInAManSuitBanned from community
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              No, I’m asking you to give me the source on Your given definition of AI. Catch on.

              • CovfefeKills
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                Oh well in that case, me. ahahahhaha wtf dumbass want to word that better

                • NotASharkInAManSuitBanned from community
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  Does it run on something that’s modelled on a neural net? Then it’s AI by definition.

                  I think you’re confusing AI with “AGI”.

                  Explain.