“The problem we face today is that, while many of these methods can provide sound inference, they are not easily mapped to language.”
How about we model language – it is vastly more powerful than mathematical symbolism – “the river is rising and he can’t swim” – it integrates all of propositional, temporal and existential logic and relations easily.
“its short-term predictions are usually accurate as well, and its initial reactions to challenges are swift and generally appropriate.”
Don’t think so – people can do amazingly stupid things.
“proposes a research arc starting from integrating knowledge graphs”
Knowledge graphs aren’t the answer – we need undirected active knowledge structures.
You praise System 2 without pointing out its severe deficiencies.
Our conscious mind has a Four Pieces Limit – it clumps things that are beyond that limit, and can make a whole string of mistakes because of it. Economists are the poster children for this – they fix on an answer which sort of works at the moment, but factors that were assumed as constants drift with time – a shining example was working out whether inflation would be transitory or long lasting. There were Nobel laureates on both sides – it sounded more like “thoughts and prayers” than analysis. Another example is a group of specialists with a specification – a lawyer, an avionics expert, a logistics expert. They don’t understand what the other is saying, and make billion dollar stuffups. We need a machine to hold a lot more live in its head than we can. So no, we shouldn’t try to model a machine on us.
“The problem we face today is that, while many of these methods can provide sound inference, they are not easily mapped to language.”
How about we model language – it is vastly more powerful than mathematical symbolism – “the river is rising and he can’t swim” – it integrates all of propositional, temporal and existential logic and relations easily.
“its short-term predictions are usually accurate as well, and its initial reactions to challenges are swift and generally appropriate.”
Don’t think so – people can do amazingly stupid things.
“proposes a research arc starting from integrating knowledge graphs”
Knowledge graphs aren’t the answer – we need undirected active knowledge structures.
You praise System 2 without pointing out its severe deficiencies.
Our conscious mind has a Four Pieces Limit – it clumps things that are beyond that limit, and can make a whole string of mistakes because of it. Economists are the poster children for this – they fix on an answer which sort of works at the moment, but factors that were assumed as constants drift with time – a shining example was working out whether inflation would be transitory or long lasting. There were Nobel laureates on both sides – it sounded more like “thoughts and prayers” than analysis. Another example is a group of specialists with a specification – a lawyer, an avionics expert, a logistics expert. They don’t understand what the other is saying, and make billion dollar stuffups. We need a machine to hold a lot more live in its head than we can. So no, we shouldn’t try to model a machine on us.