Maybe it's a good indicator of misuse when the paper didn't mention 'AI', or 'intelligence' once.
> my thesis that "AI" is an ever sliding window that means "something we don't yet have
Or maybe it's the sliding window of "well, turns out this ain't it, there is more to intelligence than we wanted it to be".
If everything is intelligent, nothing is. If you define pattern recognition as intelligence, you'd be challenged to find unintelligent lifeforms, for example. You haven't learned to recognize faces, you are literally born with this ability. And well, life at least has agency. Is evolution itself intelligent? What about water slowly wearing down rock into canyons?
> my thesis that "AI" is an ever sliding window that means "something we don't yet have
Or maybe it's the sliding window of "well, turns out this ain't it, there is more to intelligence than we wanted it to be".
If everything is intelligent, nothing is. If you define pattern recognition as intelligence, you'd be challenged to find unintelligent lifeforms, for example. You haven't learned to recognize faces, you are literally born with this ability. And well, life at least has agency. Is evolution itself intelligent? What about water slowly wearing down rock into canyons?