Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
AI & Trust
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="SelfSim" data-source="post: 77578288" data-attributes="member: 354922"><p>Just been looking at the other thread at <a href="https://www.christianforums.com/threads/ai-learnt-something-from-the-physical-life-sciences-forum.8289499/page-2#post-77574595" target="_blank">the AlphaGeometry example</a> provided by [USER=352921]@sjastro[/USER].</p><p>It is an example of where AI came up with a unique proof .. and an example of what happened when it did.</p><p></p><p>Analysis of its proof concluded that:</p><p></p><p>So the human 'intuition' evident there, is skepticism and a drive towards understanding what is being presented by AI.</p><p></p><p>I think its a good example of how the humans looking at its proof, found difficulty in simply <em>trusting</em> the proof before their eyes.</p><p></p><p>IOW, perhaps, one could extrapolate by saying that the solution to any given problem, might not be worth more than the understanding of <em>'the how'</em> of what was derived(?)</p><p></p><p>PS: I have to be careful here, because that last hypothesis attracts abundant evidence supporting it, from the CF 'debates' on how Creationists and scientific thinkers arrive at their respective conclusions about what is real and what is belief.</p><p></p><p>PPS: Solutions are still models awaiting testing .. and are thus unlikely to be trusted by scientific thinkers until the results of those tests have been extensively reviewed and agreed, as having been replicated and conducted objectively.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="SelfSim, post: 77578288, member: 354922"] Just been looking at the other thread at [URL='https://www.christianforums.com/threads/ai-learnt-something-from-the-physical-life-sciences-forum.8289499/page-2#post-77574595']the AlphaGeometry example[/URL] provided by [USER=352921]@sjastro[/USER]. It is an example of where AI came up with a unique proof .. and an example of what happened when it did. Analysis of its proof concluded that: So the human 'intuition' evident there, is skepticism and a drive towards understanding what is being presented by AI. I think its a good example of how the humans looking at its proof, found difficulty in simply [I]trusting[/I] the proof before their eyes. IOW, perhaps, one could extrapolate by saying that the solution to any given problem, might not be worth more than the understanding of [I]'the how'[/I] of what was derived(?) PS: I have to be careful here, because that last hypothesis attracts abundant evidence supporting it, from the CF 'debates' on how Creationists and scientific thinkers arrive at their respective conclusions about what is real and what is belief. PPS: Solutions are still models awaiting testing .. and are thus unlikely to be trusted by scientific thinkers until the results of those tests have been extensively reviewed and agreed, as having been replicated and conducted objectively. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
AI & Trust
Top
Bottom