Chomsky calls it a sophisticated form of computational behaviorism. Just like the research program of behaviorism died out, this will eventually too. There are other respectable criticisms of AI, like Hubert Dreyfus' 'What computers can't do'.
Neither Chomsky nor Dreyfus claimed that machine learning and/or AI won't solve any problems, but rather that the kind of problems these solve are not relevant in terms of aspiring to be humans.
Chomsky's "Where AI went wrong" is often ignored by the mainstream AI community or dismissed. Peter Norvig's retort was poorly constructed, and showed that he didn't comprehend Chomsky's argument.
Machine Learning and AI are stuck in a rut and apparently these so called ML/AI experts know better. The Deep Learning (along with ML) craze is a hindrance to a true scientific theory of intelligence.
Neither Chomsky nor Dreyfus claimed that machine learning and/or AI won't solve any problems, but rather that the kind of problems these solve are not relevant in terms of aspiring to be humans.