Tom Dietterich weighs in on what counts as a machine: designer intent vs. a system's own purposes
tdietterich · x · 2026-10-12
Veteran AI researcher Thomas Dietterich joined an X debate on what defines a "machine." He notes machines are usually understood as systems a designer intends to perform tasks, and asks whether a definition should instead consider only the system itself and its relationship to the environment. He adds that while biological systems use energy to perform tasks, some philosophers argue systems with "their own purposes" differ fundamentally from externally designed machines.
Related event: Dietterich Sparks Debate Over the Definition of "Machine"(2 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Mathematicians mostly excited about AI, grad students and postdocs hit hardest — _onionesque · 2026-10-12
- Mathematicians mostly excited about AI, grad students and postdocs hit hardest — _onionesque · 2026-10-12
- Palantir CTO Calls AGI Hype a 'Mass Psychosis', Cites Researchers Smoking as Faith Signal — AlexTensor · 2026-10-12
- Derya Unutmaz: the list of things AI can't do is shrinking toward zero — DeryaTR_ · 2026-10-12
- Quasi-RH grants drying up: how AI is forcing math academia to rethink incentives — _onionesque · 2026-10-12
- Billion AI scientists will tackle aging, predicts AI commentator — Dr_Singularity · 2026-10-12