Adam Gopnik

In Adam Gopnik's article, “Get Smart,” he effectively evaluates true smartness of the machines of modern technology. Gopnik raises some good points to support the fact that machines are currently not as witty as human. For me, the most interesting point of the article is when Gopnik notes and then goes on to explain that the machines only have good memory but they cannot react to situations for which they are not prepared.
Gopnik explains that the only reason a computer system named Watson won the jeopardy is that it has a huge data base to draw answers from. His argument is true. The intelligence displayed by the computer is a result of just Surface learning. However, to outwit a competent human being the computers should engage in Deep learning. For example, if a student was to just memorize a concept to learn it (Surface learning), he/she is consequently missing out on learning the application of the concept (Deep learning), which is more crucial compared to just knowing the concept. Likewise, in the case of the Watson computer, if the computer lacks the database with straight answers, there would have been no way it would have defeated the human opponent in Jeopardy.
Furthermore, there is a concept that I just learned in my first Psychology 101 class: If …show more content…
Artificial intelligence (AI) is still in its primitive stages. Consequently, computers fail to be good at tasks like Poker as Gopnik’s article suggests. Nevertheless, once the development of artificial intelligence changes its gears and picks up the speed, there is a decent chance for the computers and machines to actually outsmart the best of human beings. However, it would probably take decades for the Artificial intelligence to reach a point where it can intellectually defeat humans. Thus, for now, it can be said that computers do not have the potential to truly outsmart the human