I suppose? But one of those hands influences public opinion and the other doesn't

If only academia actually did shape public perceptions

Particularly ironic is that the article attempted to use topic modeling algorithms to show changes in discourse over time and came to the conclusion 'Yeah, they help make nice visualizations but don't really tell you anything you didn't know already.'

(Washington Post, 10/6/1913)

Meanwhile

monoskop.org/images/c/ce/...

(we are spiking your electric bills to find taller mountains that folks think will take them to the moon)

I'm just a man, standing in front of the AI discourse, begging it to read Hubert Dreyfus

Very cool! I'm not surprised he anticipated that (much of the criticism is GOFAI specific) - but I imagine he still suspected that embodiment (and its irreducible ambiguity) would be a necessary foundation for AI to replicate our original mode of experience (in a situation/world) and consciousness

(while simultaneously an incredibly touching portrait of a people and time)

Excuse you. Middlemarch is one of the funniest novels ever written, and it holds up incredibly well. Stuff like this slaps:

I would contend that "require more effort" is a better frame than "boring as fuck"

I've been waiting to see real engagement with Dreyfus. While we are no longer in the world of heuristic algorithms, much of the critique in What Computers Can't Do still applies (e.g. the difference between unformatted sensory experience and the data inputs read by machines)

I've been waiting to see real engagement with Dreyfus. While we are no longer in the world of heuristic algorithms, much of the critique in What Computers Can't Do still applies (e.g. the difference between unformatted sensory experience and the data inputs read by machines)