It’s OK to call it Artificial Intelligence: I wrote about how people really love objecting to the term "AI" to describe LLMs and suchlike because those things aren't actually "intelligent" - but the term AI has been used to describe exactly this kind of research since 1955, and arguing otherwise at this point isn't a helpful contribution to the discussion.
@simon Counterargument: https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2024/01/02/the-i-in-llm-stands-for-intelligence/
"AI" as a term, like many other things, was a male ego thing. McCarthy: "I wished to avoid having either to accept Norbert (not Robert) Wiener as a guru or having to argue with him." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_artificial_intelligence
"AI" is the biggest terminology stretch in the history of computing, and using it is "OK" only because everybody else is doing it, but that's a weak excuse.
@astrojuanlu I hadn't seen that quote regarding cybernetics before, that's fascinating!
![CITATION (Wikipedia screenshot)
[75] McCarthy, John (1988). "Review of The Question of Artificial Intelligence". Annals of the History of Computing. 10 (3): 224-229., collected in McCarthy, John (1996). "10.
Review of The Question of Artificial Intelligence".
Defending Al Research: A Collection of Essays and Reviews. CSLI., p. 73 "[O]ne of the reasons for inventing the term "artificial intelligence" was to escape association with "cybernetics". Its concentration on analog feedback seemed misguided, and I wished to avoid having either to accept Norbert (not Robert) Wiener as a guru or having to argue with him."](/proxy/post_attachment/144041/73811eac2a.jpeg "CITATION (Wikipedia screenshot)
[75] McCarthy, John (1988). \"Review of The Question of Artificial Intelligence\". Annals of the History of Computing. 10 (3): 224-229., collected in McCarthy, John (1996). \"10.
Review of The Question of Artificial Intelligence\".
Defending Al Research: A Collection of Essays and Reviews. CSLI., p. 73 \"[O]ne of the reasons for inventing the term \"artificial intelligence\" was to escape association with \"cybernetics\". Its concentration on analog feedback seemed misguided, and I wished to avoid having either to accept Norbert (not Robert) Wiener as a guru or having to argue with him.\"")
@astrojuanlu @simon some (such as me) might claim everything about AI, not just the name, is a male ego thing. Also cybernetics was about much more than artificial intelligence.
I didn't know that either. I can see why one would want to disassociate symbolic AI from cybernetics, but of course there's an irony given where AI ended up. The trend towards connectionism in AI was already well underway by the early 90s, though; considering neural networks as AI is nothing new.