![]() This just means that the brain continuously predicts what its inputs will be. Over the rest of book Hawkins laid out a theory of intelligence that he has continued to develop over the last two decades last year he published A Thousand Brains: A New Theory of Intelligence, that distilled the theory to its essence: I couldn’t prove it, but I knew it as much as one can intuitively know anything. The biggest reason I thought computers would not be intelligent is that I understood how computers worked, down to the level of the transistor physics, and this knowledge gave me a strong intuitive sense that brains and computers were fundamentally different. One has a central processor, one has no centralized control. One has to be perfect to work at all, one is naturally flexible and tolerant of failures. In 2004, Jeff Hawkins, who was at that point most well-known for being the founder of Palm and Handspring, released a book with Sandra Blakeslee called On Intelligence the first chapter is about Artificial Intelligence, which Hawkins declared to be a flawed construct:Ĭomputers and brains are built on completely different principles. This observation of how ChatGPT works is often wielded by those skeptical about assertions of intelligence sure, the prediction is impressive, and nearly always right, but it’s not actually thinking - and besides, it’s sometimes wrong. Hd2VlsvpfyĬhatGPT was not, of course, expounding on its reasoning, at least in a technical sense: ChatGPT has no memory rather, when Conover asked the bot to explain what it meant his question included all of the session’s previous questions and answers, which provided the context necessary for the bot to simulate an ongoing conversation, and then statistically predict the answer, word-by-word, that satisfied the query. ![]() ![]() What is the historical angle on today’s news? What is happening on the business side? Where is value being created? How does this translate to normals?ĬhatGPT seems to affirm that I have accomplished my goal Mike Conover ran an interesting experiment where he asked ChatGPT to identify the author of my previous Article, The End of Silicon Valley (Bank), based solely on the first four paragraphs: 1 ![]() But I think there might be a niche for context. And there are some fantastic writers who divine what it all means. There are lots of (great!) sites that cover the day-to-day. It’s these sorts of questions that I’m particularly keen to answer about technology. What are the winds like? What have they been like historically, and can we use that to better understand what will happen next? Is there a major wave just off the horizon that will reshape the race? Are there fundamental qualities in the ships themselves that matter far more than whatever skipper is at hand? Perhaps this image is from the America’s Cup, and the trailing boat is quite content to mirror the leading boat all the way to victory after all, this is but one leg in a far larger race. Rest assured there is breathless coverage of every twist and turn, and skippers are alternately held as heroes and villains, and nothing in between. Perhaps it’s a race, and one boat is winning - until it isn’t, of course. Ten years ago ( from last Saturday) I launched Stratechery with an image of sailboats:Ī simple image.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |