I usually like to refer to Five as analogous to an insect — trained on an evolutionary timescale, operates via ingrained “instincts” which handle even unexpected things in its environment, but can’t quickly adapt to pick up new skills.
Feels like a step forward but much remains.
I understand the point. But a counterargument is that it’s reasonable to spot the algorithm that kind of training time to compensate for millennia of human evolution on the other side.
5
14
1
144
That’s a fair point, meant to be more evocative than a rigorous claim. We also don’t have evidence that Five can’t adapt!
Apr 14, 2019 · 4:43 AM UTC
1
2
