When artificial idiocy isn’t just artificial

Artificial intelligence idiocy

It’s really rather ludicrous.

Developers of artificial idiocy have been getting themselves all excited that they can read human minds. Except that the dataset they’re working from didn’t filter out the sequence of the images. And so the artificial idiots have been matching on the sequence because the images weren’t randomized.[1]

My god, they’re idiots. Both the machines and their developer/fans. And there is no excuse for it. None. The neurologists blame the artificial idiocy fan boys for not listening to neurologists,[2] but this is not rocket science. The fan boys should have figured this out for themselves.

Purdue University, “Blind Spots Uncovered at the Intersection of AI and Neuroscience – Dozens of Scientific Papers Debunked,” SciTechDaily, April 3, 2021, https://scitechdaily.com/blind-spots-uncovered-at-the-intersection-of-ai-and-neuroscience-dozens-of-scientific-papers-debunked/



  1. [1]Purdue University, “Blind Spots Uncovered at the Intersection of AI and Neuroscience – Dozens of Scientific Papers Debunked,” SciTechDaily, April 3, 2021, https://scitechdaily.com/blind-spots-uncovered-at-the-intersection-of-ai-and-neuroscience-dozens-of-scientific-papers-debunked/
  2. [2]Purdue University, “Blind Spots Uncovered at the Intersection of AI and Neuroscience – Dozens of Scientific Papers Debunked,” SciTechDaily, April 3, 2021, https://scitechdaily.com/blind-spots-uncovered-at-the-intersection-of-ai-and-neuroscience-dozens-of-scientific-papers-debunked/

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.