> I'm not the one claiming that a calculator thinks. The burden of proof lies on those that do. Claims require evidence and extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
You're right, I may have misconstrued the original claim. I took the parent to be saying something like "calculators understand math, but also, understanding isn't particularly important with respect to AI" but I may have gotten some wires crossed. This isn't the old argument about submarines that swim, I don't think.
> I'm not the one claiming that a calculator thinks. The burden of proof lies on those that do. Claims require evidence and extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
You're right, I may have misconstrued the original claim. I took the parent to be saying something like "calculators understand math, but also, understanding isn't particularly important with respect to AI" but I may have gotten some wires crossed. This isn't the old argument about submarines that swim, I don't think.
> Understanding is a superpower.
Thanks, this is all well-put.