Artificial Intelligence

   

True ai Should not be a Winner, But a Loser

Authors: Dimiter Dobrev

There is an inaccuracy in the modern definition of AI. Today's definition says that AI is a program that is successful. Indeed, for a program to be successful, it must be intelligent, but the opposite is not true. A program can be intelligent but not successful, simply because it has other goals and does not strive for the success in question. From a theoretical point of view, the modern definition of AI is good enough, because it gives us an answer to the question "What is AI" even though it does not describe all intelligent programs, but only some of them. From a practical point of view, however, this definition is not sufficient. The reason is that we are on the verge of creating true AI and we need to choose from all intelligent programs the one with which we will best live. It turns out that it is not good to choose one of the successful programs. It would be better to choose a program that does not blindly strive for victory. Such a program can be called a loser, because it will not be successful enough. However, in both humans and AI, reckless ambition is not a positive quality.

Comments: 6 Pages. In Bulgarian

Download: PDF

Submission history

[v1] 2026-04-26 18:24:54

Unique-IP document downloads: 10 times

Vixra.org is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. Vixra.org will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.

Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.

comments powered by Disqus