<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Symbolic Behaviour in Artificial Intelligence · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2102.03406/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2102.03406/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Symbolic Behaviour in Artificial Intelligence — mentioned by JamilD</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27463385</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2102.03406:27463385</guid><pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 2021 17:45:16 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Many of DeepMind&amp;#x27;s opinion style papers are like this. Another example of the &amp;quot;handwavy&amp;quot; DeepMind paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2102.03406.pdf It&amp;#x27;s also worth it to note as well that this isn&amp;#x27;t a homogenous organization, many DeepMind employees have different opinions on issues like this and an individual paper isn&amp;#x27;t representative of the entire organization.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2102.03406/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.AI</category></item><item><title>Symbolic Behaviour in Artificial Intelligence — mentioned by ppod</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26236483</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2102.03406:26236483</guid><pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2021 12:24:28 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;This article is correct about underspecification, but completely dodges the argument on language and understanding, drawing the hackneyed, shallow distinction between &amp;quot;pattern matching&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;understanding&amp;quot;. How do you define understand? People just use the word &amp;quot;understand&amp;quot; to fill in for the magic stuff that they say humans can do but machines can&amp;#x27;t. They also sometimes use &amp;quot;symbolic reasoning&amp;quot; that way, but the best work on machine understanding and symbolic reason is done by DeepMind: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2102.03406.pdf The examples in the original article are about truth, not…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2102.03406/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.AI</category></item><item><title>Symbolic Behaviour in Artificial Intelligence — HN submission</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26086818</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:submission:2102.03406:26086818</guid><pubDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2021 08:36:00 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Symbolic Behaviour in Artificial Intelligence&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;2 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. &lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2102.03406/"&gt;Paper and source history&lt;/a&gt;. A submission is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.AI</category></item></channel></rss>
