10
$\begingroup$

The site is described as "For people interested in conceptual questions about life and challenges in a world where "cognitive" functions can be mimicked in purely digital environment."

However, this does not seem to be what the questions are actually about. The blurb makes it seem that the site is about the effects of AI on the world, while the questions are actually about the theoretical foundation and implementation of AI technology. I believe the blurb should be changed to reflect the reality of the site's use. This can be done without making the philosophy questions off topic.

| |
$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ If questions on implementation of AI technology become on-topic, then we would have another duplicate of stats.stackexchange.com $\endgroup$ – Franck Dernoncourt Jun 4 '17 at 17:47
  • $\begingroup$ @FranckDernoncourt It's like saying, since the questions about Linux on Ubuntu or Server Fault are on-topic, then they should be duplicate of Linux/Unix SE site. Statistics are only small part of AI. $\endgroup$ – kenorb Jun 7 '17 at 15:30
  • $\begingroup$ @A.W.Grossbard Can you give some few examples of the questions which you mean? $\endgroup$ – kenorb Jun 7 '17 at 15:30
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @kenorb how about only allowing non stastical AI questions here? $\endgroup$ – Franck Dernoncourt Jun 7 '17 at 15:46
  • $\begingroup$ @FranckDernoncourt How would you force that? A.I. is self-explanatory. $\endgroup$ – kenorb Jun 7 '17 at 16:00
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @kenorb Defining the scope is up us $\endgroup$ – Franck Dernoncourt Jun 7 '17 at 16:37
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The reality is a lot of people come to AI instead of CV or Computational Science. The best way, imo, to raise awareness of those Stacks is to field such questions, when basic, on AI, to introduce the concepts, and use the answers to point users (and direct traffic) to CV and CS. What new Stack users think AI is is a factor that needs to be accounted for. UX for new Stack users is, in general, horrible, and trusted users need to do everything they can to facilitate new user participation. Providing answers trumps strict adherence to the rules * guideline, imo. $\endgroup$ – DukeZhou Aug 2 '17 at 15:32
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @DukeZhou, It may be helpful to restate the view in the above comment, a good one, on the AI site description question initiated by Ben (ai.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1430/…). I, for one, would like to see a description text proposal written by you, particularly because you seem to have an overall perspective about SE's role in the www in general, like Frank, Douglas, Ken, and Robert. $\endgroup$ – FauChristian Sep 29 '18 at 22:34
  • $\begingroup$ Possible duplicate of What should the AI.SE Site Description be? $\endgroup$ – kenorb Oct 9 '18 at 12:09
3
$\begingroup$

If the site description is confusing, you can always propose a new one:

so it can be voted.

This site comes from the 'scientific' category, so both conceptual and scientific question are allowed, exempt the technical questions such as modelling and implementation (e.g. how to do X in the framework Y), where we've dedicated sites for such questions. It's still difficult to draw a line between technical vs non-technical , or modelling vs implementation questions. However if you've any suggestions which can help, please share.

I think this post describes the site in better words:

Artificial Intelligence Stack Exchange is a site for people interested in social, conceptual and scientific questions about Advanced Computing.

| |
$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Kinda interesting.though most people think of artificial intelligence (AI) they think of HAL 9000 from "2001: A Space Odyssey," Data from "Star Trek," or more recently, the android Ava from "Ex Machina." But to a computer scientist that isn't what AI necessarily is, and the question "what is AI?" can be a complicated one. $\endgroup$ – quintumnia Jul 9 '17 at 20:54
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ One of the critiques of this Stack is that there are not enough experienced experts. I strongly believe encouraging more science and math question would be a way of attracting such experts. I'm even of the opinion that AI is an appropriate place for very basic questions that would also fall under the bailiwick of Cross Validated and Computational Science, and that AI can serve as a feeder to those Stacks. $\endgroup$ – DukeZhou Aug 2 '17 at 15:29
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @DukeZhou I absolutely agree. I came across the site, and expected to be able to ask questions about theory of the AIXI agent (for example), and was very disappointed to find that it was mostly focused on social issues. At the very least, it seems like the history of AI theory should be on-topic, and all of that is very technical. There's kind of a chicken-and-egg problem here--the site can't be properly defined until it attracts enough experts, and it won't attract experts until there are interesting questions. $\endgroup$ – datageist Aug 9 '17 at 15:40
  • $\begingroup$ @datageist That's exactly the feedback we need! Thanks for commenting. I took the liberty of opening up a separate meta question for this suggestion, which I strongly agree with: ai.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1299/1671 $\endgroup$ – DukeZhou Aug 9 '17 at 18:33

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .