The fable behind certain misunderstandings associated with artificial intelligence

The problem of generating certain fables or myths about artificial intelligence lies in the fact that in this area terms are used that are often quite difficult to understand, if we take into account what has been said above, and that added to an exaggerated enthusiasm in expecting certain results within artificial intelligence that in my opinion are difficult to reach and achieve, it has been possible to obtain a series of false conceptions about the way in which the elements that give life to artificial intelligence work and the capacity that these computer systems have.

Perhaps they are not all, but today there are many people and scholars of technology and science who believe that artificial intelligence will far surpass humans in optimizing the activities that we humans do, this from my point of view would be a serious overestimation that is being made on artificial intelligence, so I will give some examples and considerations based on simple reflections imbued with simple logic.

The concern for the future from my perspective should not really be about whether there will be a domination of robots and machines over humans, but rather we should be concerned about the awkwardness of wanting to put everything we do today into the hands of machines without knowing whether the machines are as immensely clever as many people think.

Let's analyze this statement and see if it can be disproved: "Artificial intelligence explains the functioning of the brain."

Who can study and analyze the behavior of a brain if not another brain, ie the only ones who are in the power to study the human brain are the same humans, what can bring the AI is to achieve improvements in digital processes so that we humans can see it more clearly, but in the end it is we ourselves who give final verdict on the study of the brain.

Have you ever heard anyone say

"Artificial intelligence works like human brains."

Undoubtedly that here we have another fabulation more than debunking and locating in context, even though within AI are spoken of neural networks, this is only a point to call it in some way since there must be a system of connected networks, but that are certainly not neurons like those that the human being has in his organism , therefore we can also say that the structures that connect these AI system are not "biologically existing, therefore they do not have to be considered neural networks, nor think that they carry human organs inside them much less.

In recent times I make a post about the importance of mathematics, algebra and differential calculation in machine learning, this I mention it to be able to take down other of the erroneous postulates that can be heard over there, among these is:

"Learning methods about artificial intelligence are different from machine learning or statistics"

This is totally false, since overall the fundamental purpose of all these fields and subfields such as machine learning, computing and artificial intelligence uses data analysis, it can only change the application methodology and some objectives a little, but that they are related by the use of data analysis, makes them quite binding.

If I continue to make guesses, I will surely find more false and exaggerated assertions that I have to deny, so I will only deny one last one, which can leave us a deep reflection of what I think we are over-estimating and exaggerating:

"Artificial intelligence is about machines being able to think"

Intelligence is associated with that innate capacity to think, the only ones we think of are humans, therefore the only biological entities with that faculty are humans, therefore in machines this capacity is completely discarded.

There is no denying the fact that AI has been and will continue to improve the process in the lifestyle of humanity, but from there to the machines thinking under that human concept I think there is a very big distance.

I leave this question for your answer: Do you honestly believe that AI can make machines think? if your answer is affirmative or negative because you consider it so?

I hope you found this reading interesting, see you until a next delivery. Greetings