Am I the only one who when hearing the term "Artificial Intelligence" thinks about why nobody tries to develop "Real Intelligence" instead?
I mean the term artificial imho points directly at the reason why those systems are actually so damn stupid

Not really... even when an AI had genuine, general purpose intelligence, it will still be artificial...

@ThomasRedstone That brings me to the philosophical question...If an AI is so good that nobody can distinguish it from RI, is it still artificial? When would you consider it being the Real McCoy?

@mrmarbury the terms artificial isn't about being close to a human being intelligence or being stupid. It's artificial in the terms that it was created it, programmed, it didn't "born" and was intelligence right from the start. Yes it would be something could learn and that, but someone had to program it

@LMestre14 I know, but it sounds wrong to me anyway. I also haven't come across any AI that was more than some clever algorithms that made it seem intelligent where it wasn't ... ergo artificial. I still think it is mostly a philosophical question. Even if a human created some AI. If it is really and I mean really intelligent and self-learning it will/might evolve far enough so that you cannot tell if it was created by a human in the first place. Just my 2 EuroCent. And even if not they will coin the term anyway ;) And if not we might need a new name for real good AI anyway because what is out there today will be nothing compared to what we might see in the future and our current "AI" will look like an Opossum on wheels to that let's call it True Intelligence. Maybe TI is a better term...

@mrmarbury TI = Texas Instruments O.o

To address your point about different levels of AI I mean it's basically the same thing as computers - in the early 1940s computers did like 1 thing period and they were highly mechanical - now they're this intricate electronic system that is a universal Turing Machine...

Artificial != bad