With regards to the call for interesting thoughts, IMHO there are a lot of profound ideas from decades past under the cybernetics banner, which are not getting the attention they deserve in AI. For example, most chatter of "physical AI" over-indexes on robotics; there is a lot of interesting stuff to be done in understanding the flow of information through the system, and how we could do much better, perhaps with co-design. How is it that biology takes mediocre sensors (eyes and ears) built on sloppy wetware and turns them into exquisite perceptual tools?
This reminded me of a classic from almost a century ago, which I couldn't resist sharing: https://www.ias.edu/sites/default/files/library/UsefulnessHarpers.pdf
With regards to the call for interesting thoughts, IMHO there are a lot of profound ideas from decades past under the cybernetics banner, which are not getting the attention they deserve in AI. For example, most chatter of "physical AI" over-indexes on robotics; there is a lot of interesting stuff to be done in understanding the flow of information through the system, and how we could do much better, perhaps with co-design. How is it that biology takes mediocre sensors (eyes and ears) built on sloppy wetware and turns them into exquisite perceptual tools?
Thanks for sharing will check it out
Great, I love how you're thinking about this.
Here's an idea https://github.com/guilt/TinyToT I'm publishing today and I'm happy to look for other people doing interesting things like this.
Thanks will look