Videos

AI vs Human Champion Debater – FULL DEBATE – IBM Project Debater – LIVE 2/11/2019

57Views

Disclaimer

12 Comments

  • I am at 16:00 and Harrish is doing what most debaters in the community have been doing for the longest, redirecting the question of the debate which takes away from the spirit of the motion. Most debaters also always always get away with mischaracterization of opponents' debates and win. But in this instance we have reasonable people, not political ones.

  • the computer could just be reading text file from a encyclopedia and link them with research and others materials online or in its database it doesn't mean that "he think" like we do, its just a matter of association but still impressive

  • The human has the advantage of displaying body language. The human audience is probably swayed to some extent by this. The computer voice is amazing though. Good idea to choose a female persona, most people will trust women over men about social issues. The potential of this technology is fantastic and scary at the same time. I would like to see an AI-human debate about the dangers of AI and the need to regulate it. Maybe also a rebuttal to the State of the Union address?

  • The "project debater" software really just strung together cliches, as any reasonable person should expect, because it cannot think. Notice how it mispronounced "lives" with a short "I", because it could not discern the necessary meaning. Nor could it achieve any logical nuance, or break down generalizations and apply reasoning to practical realities (like the human could). It really just kept repeating slogans and alluded to the existence of studies, and repeated themes. In other words, it has little or no intellectual nimbleness. In truth, it cannot have any. No one should be deceived, ever, into thinking that "artificial intelligence" it intelligence. Computers can't think, they can only regurgitate. They have no consciousness (obviously). AI may have some practical applications as an information tool, but it is of limited use. It is way over hyped. Throw in several billion sentences, and it will spit them out, that's all. IBM stands to lose big on this. It will (and has) attracted clients, but as they discover they are wasting their money, clients will abandon AI. Better to hire a few smart people, who think, nimbly, like the human debater. Either that or define AI downward, way down.

Leave a Reply