What is intelligence? That is a good question. The question of intelligence is connected to performance. When. A person does something that seems intelligent. We think that the person is intelligent. Things like chess games are always associated with intelligence. A good chess player is always intelligent. That is the rule. In. The world. But then. In an IBM-owned laboratory, some programmers created a computer program called “Blue Gene”. Blue Gene (BG) was “rule-based AI”.
The computer program played chess. It beat Garry Kasparov at chess. And that was the first time. When. A computer beat a human in that game. The problem with this attitude is this. Garry Kasparov is a multiple-time world champion. In. Chess. This means that the BG would beat an average person much faster than it beat Kasparov. So can we say that a human can beat a computer? If the only person with that ability is the chess grandmaster with multiple world championships. We must realise one thing. The BG did not even know. That. It played chess.
It didn’t know what it moved. It made a response move. And then the game was over. The Blue Gene played chess. But it didn’t know what it made. It just executed commands that programmers gave it. The Blue Gene forced people. To determine intelligence again. Intelligence is not performance. The Blue Gene just executed lines of code. And that was the only thing. That. It knew. Or it didn’t even know. That it executed lines of code. It was a better player than a human. But. It couldn’t do anything other than play chess. Every single. Move that could be done. Is pre-programmed in that program’s code lines. Chess is a good game for that type of program.
There is always a limited number of possible moves. Then, a couple of years ago. The state-of-the-art AI lost a game to a 1970s Atari chess console. That means that. Rule-based AI can win a game. Against. A modern AI Agent. So why can a one-purpose Atari game console beat an AI agent? Why could Blue Gene beat the world’s best chess player? The reason for that is this. The Blue Gene and ATARI. They will do nothing else. But play chess.
The situation is similar to this. Why. A pocket calculator beats supercomputers in simple calculations. The basic pocket calculator has a simple keyboard. It’s immediately ready for work. And this makes it easy to use. Those systems don’t need to boot. It is easier to use than a computer. The problem with those systems is. They are limited. They can do only one thing. They do that thing very well. But their skill set is very narrow. But those systems cannot go outside that skill set.
So, performance doesn’t mean that the system is intelligent. The system can see things. And make a response. It can sort an entire warehouse by following rules. Or it can write a speeding ticket. If. The vehicle travels too fast. If. The system uses manual data input. It is not very complicated. The user must set the number plate and speed in the system. The problem is: There are thousands of vehicles. The system operator has no time to input that data.
The answer could be a microchip-based system. That collects data about a car’s driving speed. And. If that car travels faster than the speed limit. That tells traffic control. The system can be activated in city areas. But the problem is always. Driving faster than the speed limit is allowed. It is always against the law. This is one paradox regarding our privacy. The ability to track the car. Driving faster than the speed limit breaks our privacy. Another problem. Is that. Crossing the speed limit. It is always against the law. So a person commits a traffic crime and endangers safety.
Which one is more practical? The AI agent that reads and answers emails. Or. The chess computer that can only play chess?
The rule-based systems are helpless. If. Something happens outside the order book. The system requires something. That denies its fall. That thing is the code line. That orders system to tell user. That it cannot make that thing. Ot. It has no determinant for the command. The system requires automatic input. For. Large data masses. But automation is not the same as intelligence. The system must realise. When. It cannot make something. And the system. It must have a back gate for cases that it cannot handle.
The problem with automation is this. If. We try to program every possible move into a chess program. There is always a move that nobody predicts. The answer is a system that knows the rules. But then it learns how to use its tools. Those narrow AIs are extreme tools. When. They handle precisely processed information.
The difference between automation and narrow AI is simple. The system knows the rules. But it learns other things by practising. The new style computer chess program was AlphaZero. That program knew the rules. But the system played chess against itself to learn tactics. The operator taught it the basic movements. Then the system started to play against itself. As. The data mass grew. The system learned faster. That is the key element in every AI program. The data mass that the system uses accelerates its learning.
Those systems can play chess. But they cannot do anything else either. Or they can observe marketing courses. But they cannot play chess. This means those systems can collect data. They can process data. But their codebase cannot combine that data with some action. In those programs is the codebase. That codebase connects data. It connects to some action. If. The system cannot find an action. It does nothing. This means that. Narrow AI is the thing. That could control stock market connections with bank accounts. But it cannot control physical tools.
Intelligent organisms require things they can use. The AI that doesn’t communicate. It cannot tell how intelligent it can be. The automation that makes pre-programmed moves on a chessboard. It can seem very intelligent. Those systems are more limited. Than. Modern LLMs and AI agents. But. Those AI agents and LLMs lose to them in chess. The AI agent can do many things. It can read your calendar. It can answer Emails. But it still loses at chess. Which one is more practical? AI agent or a program that can move chess buttons?
