Great take, Benn! I feel like there is a tremendous potential in going deeper with applied AI and we're about to see it's being unleashed by the latest advancements and mass adoption of the technology in the next few years. That said, doubling down on math to solve business problems might be as, if not more, limiting than modeling past what's conceivable to humans. There are infinite games, problems with no (perfect) solution, and endless cases of irrational behavior. If only we could act consistently in our best interest, behavioral economists would rule the world.
Continuing on your analogy about all of us being stuck in a prime number maze, there seem to be plenty of mazes built around real world problems that can still perplex even the most powerful of computers. Until there is a true AGI that will solve the universe.
Fair warning: The Jared Kushner rating of this comment is about 7/10.
Definitely thought-provoking. Agree with everything. Even the potential contradiction. Rely more on simple models and frameworks and reason from there. At the same time, do those frameworks keep us pinned in local maxima without even being aware of it? How do we break out of it? Is it purely a computational problem, and let the AI do its thing? How would one validate the proposed AI solution in these more complex scenarios that aren’t chess games? Can’t help but feel likes its some form of gambling or faith.
We often swing our proverbial "hammer" at problems that face us and it limits the possibilities of solving the hard problems more effectively. This is why random approaches like Oblique Strategies that was conceived by Brian Eno to compose new music was so effective (see book titled "Messy" by Tim Harford) and why author and prolific patent inventor Cliff Pickover leveraged an ancient and random strategy of divination called stichomancy (reading random passages from book to spur ideas, see "Sex, Drugs, Einstein & elves by Pickover").
Great take, Benn! I feel like there is a tremendous potential in going deeper with applied AI and we're about to see it's being unleashed by the latest advancements and mass adoption of the technology in the next few years. That said, doubling down on math to solve business problems might be as, if not more, limiting than modeling past what's conceivable to humans. There are infinite games, problems with no (perfect) solution, and endless cases of irrational behavior. If only we could act consistently in our best interest, behavioral economists would rule the world.
Continuing on your analogy about all of us being stuck in a prime number maze, there seem to be plenty of mazes built around real world problems that can still perplex even the most powerful of computers. Until there is a true AGI that will solve the universe.
Fair warning: The Jared Kushner rating of this comment is about 7/10.
Definitely thought-provoking. Agree with everything. Even the potential contradiction. Rely more on simple models and frameworks and reason from there. At the same time, do those frameworks keep us pinned in local maxima without even being aware of it? How do we break out of it? Is it purely a computational problem, and let the AI do its thing? How would one validate the proposed AI solution in these more complex scenarios that aren’t chess games? Can’t help but feel likes its some form of gambling or faith.
Benn, just love you writing. Great article. Lots to think about.
We often swing our proverbial "hammer" at problems that face us and it limits the possibilities of solving the hard problems more effectively. This is why random approaches like Oblique Strategies that was conceived by Brian Eno to compose new music was so effective (see book titled "Messy" by Tim Harford) and why author and prolific patent inventor Cliff Pickover leveraged an ancient and random strategy of divination called stichomancy (reading random passages from book to spur ideas, see "Sex, Drugs, Einstein & elves by Pickover").