"When someone says "AI", I think they mean AI, not e.g. path-finding for writing a Quake bot."
Then you're hopelessly out of touch with what most people mean when they say "AI", and what the person who asked the question wants to learn about ("Learning Algorythms and Decision Making programs").
> Then you're hopelessly out of touch with what most people mean when they say "AI"
Hopeless? Doc, are you telling me there's no cure?!?
In fact, when most people talk about AI, they mean it in the sense of, "do you think computers will one day be as intelligent as humans?". Cf. the moviefilm "AI". If that kind of AI is what you wish to pursue, then the so-called field of AI isn't going to get you there.
I'm reclaiming the term AI for actual AI from the minority that's misusing it and we're having a Pride march on the 23rd. Wheel out your servers and "represent".
Well, that "minority" is essentially the same community that invented the term in the first place. It's not like what you're observing is some ghastly secret: the AI community hasn't been seriously trying to construct strong AI for 25+ years. "AI" is a bad term, and doesn't accurately describe much of the work that is done in the field -- fair enough. Considering that trying to build strong AI is a pipedream anyway (IMHO), I don't think that's such a disaster. The person asking the question was plainly talking about weak AI techniques anyway.
And to quote Office Space: "Why should I change my name, he is the one who sucks". So personally I won't adapt "Artificial General Intelligence" into my vocabulary.
Then you're hopelessly out of touch with what most people mean when they say "AI", and what the person who asked the question wants to learn about ("Learning Algorythms and Decision Making programs").