So AI can’t be trusted because it relies on limited, biased datasets for training – unlike human intelligence, which . . . relies on limited, biased datasets for training?
Around here people have learned that Al can’t always be taken at face value.
(That is, some of what I post is tongue-in-cheek.)
In linguistics, this phenomenon almost but not quite qualifies as a homograph. (“same” + “written as”. In this case “AI” and Al" look alike when rendered in sans-serif style typefaces—but if this sentence was displayed in Times Roman font, for example, you would notice the difference in these abbreviations for Artificial Intelligence and Allen.)
And this concludes another brief instructional tangent. (@Dan, at least it is not one more story from long ago.)
Amen. Simply because the compter is just a memory operation. So any conclusions put into it are open to human error. like facial expressions. The humans did a too simple conclusions on what they mean when putting them in a computers memory. so error. A computer has no intelligence. it only has a memory.
Intelligence in humans includes memory but its almost irrelevant.