Join me @ IBOtoolbox for free.
Vlad Tverdohleb
Member Since: 7/26/2015
  
performance / stats
Country: Canada
Likes Received: 151
Featured Member: 1 times
Associates: 155
Wall Posts: 382
Comments Made: 63
Press Releases: 370
Videos: 0
Phone: 015144814545
Skype:     theprservices
profile visitor stats
TODAY: 23
THIS MONTH: 798
TOTAL: 72061
are we ibo associates?
recent videos
member advertising
none
active associates
Bill Bateman     
Last logged on: 6/20/2019


Brian Stefan    
Last logged on: 6/20/2019


Athena Gay    
Last logged on: 6/20/2019


PHIL SCHAEFER    
Last logged on: 6/20/2019


Phil Schaefer    
Last logged on: 6/20/2019


Mark Turnbull    
Last logged on: 6/20/2019


Bruno Duarte    
Last logged on: 6/20/2019


QUEENHAJAR AKANQI      
Last logged on: 6/20/2019


Mike Farris    
Last logged on: 6/20/2019


Marlena Burton    
Last logged on: 6/20/2019


Chuck Reynolds    
Last logged on: 6/20/2019


Sule Yesufu    
Last logged on: 6/20/2019


Velma Joseph     
Last logged on: 6/20/2019


Csaba Juhasz    
Last logged on: 6/20/2019


Eugenijus Sakalauskas    
Last logged on: 6/20/2019


other ibo platforms
Vlad Tverdohleb   My Press Releases

IBM’s Debater AI Is Impressive, But It Won’t Conquer Humanity

Published on 6/20/2018
For additional information  Click Here

We’re living in a strange time, when it’s increasingly difficult to distinguish a human from artificial intelligence. And, yes, it can be pretty uncanny. One recent example: Google’s demonstration of its Duplex technology, in which the software fooled an innocent (human) hairdresser into believing she was talking to a human on the phone.

And now, IBM has taken things a step further by putting on a human-robot debate, setting its brand new Project Debater against Israeli professional debater Dan Zafrir.

The demo was impressive. The AI argued, brought up supporting facts from “several hundred million articles,” and even peppered in a couple of jokes and passive-aggressive jabs at its human opponent. It was like high school debate class all over again, but with a robot.

People, naturally, found IBM’s demo “unsettling,” likely because it could argue with humans “pretty convincingly.”

But it’s important to keep in mind that the IBM demo, like that of Google’s Duplex, was a demo. Duplex might have made the call without a hitch, but Google was clear that this was a successful instance out of many previously failed attempts. How, then, would the feature function in the real world?

Similarly, IBM’s Debater AI demo went by without any major hiccups. But it did get caught up in some of its responses. It threw in some generalized comments that didn’t directly respond to the human debater’s arguments. But its creators had a simple answer for that: it’s a human(ish) thing. “If it’s less confident,” VP for IBM research Jeff Welser tells the Verge, “it’ll do its best to make an argument that’ll be convincing as an argument even if it doesn’t exactly answer that point — which is exactly what a human does, too, sometimes.”

But the AI didn’t debate like a human. It wasn’t making up arguments on the fly — the Debater took sentences it found from supporting documents, strung them together, topped them with some human flourishes, and passed them off as a debate style comparable to that of a human.  The real thing, a real human argument, would have been a lot more precise and nuanced.

And IBM wasn’t aiming to convince us that its AI was human in the first place. Its goal was to demonstrate that AI could someday help humans work through their flawed, biased, emotionally-influenced reasoning to find evidence-based solutions to problems of society and in new fields of research (this logic itself may be a bit faulty, since the Debater was trained on faulty human arguments). “Can an AI expand a human mind?” the project’s website ponders mysteriously.

Read more here.

Member Note: To comment on this PR, simply click reply on the owners main post below.
-  Copyright 2016 IBOsocial  -            Part of the IBOtoolbox family of sites.