Entrepreneur: Elon Musk Predicted Artificial Intelligence Would Be ‘Seriously Dangerous’ by 2019. How Close Is That to Reality?.
https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/323278
A great point brought up here – that AI could be narrow (trained to do a specific set of tasks) or general (intelligence that is fluid, creative, like humans are).
The current state of AI is, as the article outlines, feeding large amounts of historical data, letting the machine learn, and awaiting an output from this training.
Can we expect intelligence that extends beyond the limitations of its training set?
What kind of data and/or how do we structure these data for General AI to take shape?
The author’s stand is that we currently do not have a functional General AI which I agree with, but am more optimistic about.
One factor for my optimism is triggered by some questions he posed: there is not a single creative neuron in our minds, yet we are capable of creativity. How do we replicate that in AI? How about emotions?
Having some background in neuroscience I can chip in with a possibility.
Creativity is not purely determined by a single gene, one specific area of your brain. Creativity, in my opinion, is an interplay of natural tendency (to think, or not think, a certain way); synaptic connection, pattern recognition; motivators and parameters. Creative, thus, can be trained.
Synaptic Strength and Pattern Recognition: The more we are trained to associate certain elements and ideas together, the stronger our synaptic connections. This can go both ways. In one, stronger connections encourages pattern recognition. We associate disparate or related concepts quickly to create an new output from existing elements.
On the other, the more we associate related concepts, the harder it gets to break down these associations to think of new links – in other words, new perspectives and creativity.
Motivators: motivators to me are emotions, external stimulators like the environment. Great war poets and lyrical verses on love are stimulated by war, by heartbreak, suffering. How do we stimulate, for a machine without survival instinct and emotions, a motivation to create?
Parameters as replacement for motivators: Just as we teach infants, we train machines at the early stage with rules and parameters to define and structure learning. Since we have yet a viable model for motivators, could we train machines to break these parameters once they have matured in its learning? (As Audemars Piaget would say, we have to first master the rules to break them.)
Is there a specific way humans bend and break parameters to exhibit creativity?
Q.bit 