To me they're the same thing. If there's a bunch of training data that is fed into a system that creates a model, then it's not traditional programming, where someone laboriously writes out if statements by hand. AI and ML aren't, as far as I'm aware, rigorously specifically defined terms. They're words that marketing picked up and ran with it. To me, what matters is: is there a black box somewhere in the system that's a bag of numbers, or is it code that a human could dig in and read.

> but not all AI is machine learning

I will instead pick at this latter part of your claim. What is an example of something that is AI but that is not ML..?

> The “overlap” is that all machine learning is AI ...

"All machine learning" is not AI, as k-means clustering and linear regression, amongst others, are very much ML without qualifying as AI algorithms.

Bayes is turning in his grave fast enough to power Manhattan.

There are both ML that is not AI, and AI that is not ML.

For example, if you pick them manually, decision trees can be AI but not ML. Video game character behavior is a trivial example.

Eliza for example is also not ML, but could be called AI.

Likewise, there is ML that is not AI. Such is debatable, because you could always argue that using machine-learning on anything results in intelligence. The way I see it, things like image enhancement or voice replacement are not artificial intelligence at all. I probably could not define a hard line where it becomes artificial intelligence though.

At this point AI is a marketing term not an actual category

I don't see how including machine learning under the artificial intelligence umbrella counts as calling machine learning AI.

You must be thinking of a different machine learning. All the on-device machine learning, backend machine learning, OCR, etc. was all called "machine learning" before LLMs. Yes, the field of artificial intelligence still existed, often used machine learning, and called the result "AI". But Apple would call keyboard prediction machine learning. Microsoft would call OCR machine learning. YouTube called machine transcription machine learning. Google called camera image enhancement machine learning.

Microsoft now calls everything AI (actually mostly "Copilot"). YouTube now calls everything AI (including genuine LLMs and generative features, but also everything it used to call machine learning). Google now calls everything AI (including everything it used to call machine learning). Apple is seemingly the only one immune.

My argument is not that no one ever used "AI" to refer to a product that utilized machine learning, but rather that the term of art in the industry for machine learning itself was actually "machine learning", not "AI", until LLMs took over and made it "AI".

You would not pull a library off the shelf for "AI", it would be for machine learning. You would not implement and perform "AI", but machine learning. Even central parts of the AI ecosystem like PyTorch advertise as being for "deep learning", which is a subset of machine learning. Not "AI".

I took one longer ago than that and it wasn't all perceptrons and neural networks. It included other things too, like: planning, search methods, inference engines, decision trees, ...

Are welding machines at the Volkswagen factory robots?