The book is actually based on existing technologies, and was written by a professor of robots with some expertise in what currently passes for “AI”.
The book actually has some practical insights into dealing with the natural hard-to-fix flaws in real robots in daily life.
That said, the book is clearly meant as a work of humor.
Or it was clear, when it was first published, anyway. Some of the overblown “they will inevitably send robots to kill us” stuff is less obviously satire, today.
AI is just a marketing name. Machine learning, generative LLMs, etc. is what we should be calling that, but the simplification leads to misleading name.
We can rebuild after it fails. If it seriously starts replacing people and there’s no regulation against corporations doing it we’re done
Yes. And if so, we all need to do our reading, first:
How To Survive a Robot Uprising: Tips on Defending Yourself Against the Coming Rebellion
It is not real AI, I don’t think that would be useful. I’m not sure why people are so crazy about using plausible answer generators, but here we are.
The book is actually based on existing technologies, and was written by a professor of robots with some expertise in what currently passes for “AI”.
The book actually has some practical insights into dealing with the natural hard-to-fix flaws in real robots in daily life.
That said, the book is clearly meant as a work of humor.
Or it was clear, when it was first published, anyway. Some of the overblown “they will inevitably send robots to kill us” stuff is less obviously satire, today.
AI is just a marketing name. Machine learning, generative LLMs, etc. is what we should be calling that, but the simplification leads to misleading name.