Yes, and that is why the "artificial" qualifier is used. Artificial sugar is not sugar. Artificial flowers aren't flowers. That's the entire point of the term.
AI as a field deals with teaching computers to approximate human intelligence. The term has been used since the 60s, and isn't going to change because random people are throwing online tantrums.
Except only those working in the field are familiar with the historical context and "AI as a field from the 60s".
The public only see the advertisements. Are we really going to blame the victims and tell them, of course it's not intelligent, you dumbass, why did you trust its answer?
you shouldn't have fallen for our marketing.
Comments
Yes, and that is why the "artificial" qualifier is used. Artificial sugar is not sugar. Artificial flowers aren't flowers. That's the entire point of the term.
AI as a field deals with teaching computers to approximate human intelligence. The term has been used since the 60s, and isn't going to change because random people are throwing online tantrums.
Except only those working in the field are familiar with the historical context and "AI as a field from the 60s".
The public only see the advertisements. Are we really going to blame the victims and tell them, of course it's not intelligent, you dumbass, why did you trust its answer? you shouldn't have fallen for our marketing.