Reply to post: Re: lexical clone

Fool ML once, shame on you. Fool ML twice, shame on... the AI dev? If you can hoodwink one model, you may be able to trick many more

Michael Wojcik Silver badge

Re: lexical clone

Ah, it's always good to hear from one of the commentariat's resident kooks. Ilya, I don't think I've ever seen anyone else use the phrase "lexical clone" the way you do, but if you have a reference for some text which does, I'd like to read it.

Is it worth pointing out that 1) humans can also be deceived, or that 2) it is not a priori obvious that there is any functional distinction between human intelligence and the universe of possible "artificial models"? Attempts to prove such a difference generally either appeal to untestable attributes or rather suspect arguments about formal power (viz. Penrose).

(Also, I have to say that I skimmed your patent and I'm not sure I see anything very novel there, except perhaps your compatibility formula. Expanding a kernel phrase into a small corpus using synonyms and grammatical transformations is pretty well established in NLP. But I didn't look at it terribly closely.)

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon