John, Thank you for the info.
I just did a rough count of all the "IMG SRC="http://"; in the source of the NYTimes home page which down loaded to my cable-modem connected computer in about 3 seconds. I counted roughly 50 occurrences of that string. I assume there a many other downloaded files such as for layout info. Lets guess a total of at least 100 files that have to be requested and downloaded and displayed. That would be about 33 per second. So what could one do with a system that could do on average about 20 accesses a second on a sustained rate, if a user was leaving it one at night as part of an OpenCog-at-Home project. It seems to me that that would be enough for some interesting large corpus NL work in conjunction with a distributed web crawler. Ed Porter -----Original Message----- From: John G. Rose [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 7:27 PM To: agi@v2.listbox.com Subject: RE: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research] > From: Ed Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > As I have said many before, to have brain-level AGI I believe you need > within several orders of magnitude the representational, computational, > and > interconnect capability of the human mind. > > If you had 1 million PC bots on the web, the representational and > computational power would be there. But what sort of interconnect would > you > have? What is the average cable box connected computers upload > bandwidth? > > Is it about 1MBit/sec? If so that would be a bandwidth of 1TBit/sec. > But > presumably only a small percent of that total 1TBit/sec could be > effectively > used, say 100Gbits/sec. That's way below brain level, but it is high > enough > to do valuable AGI research. > > But would even 10% of this total 1Tbit/sec bandwidth be practically > available? > > How many messages a second can a PC upload a second at say 100K, 10K, > 1K, > and 128 bytes each? Does anybody know? I've gone through all this while being in VOIP R&D. MANY different connections at many different bandwidths, latencies, QOS, it's dirty across the board. Communications between different points is very non-homogenous. There are "deep" connections and "surface" alluding to deep web and surface web though network topology is somewhat independent of permissions. The physical infrastructure of the internet allows for certain extremely high bandwidth, low latency connections where the edge is typically lower bandwidth, higher latency but it does depend on the hop graph, time of day, etc.. Messages per sec depends on many factors - network topology starting from pc bus, to NIC, to LAN switch and router, to other routers to ISPs, between ISPs, back in other end, etc.. A cable box usually does anywhere from 64kbit to 1.4mbit upload depending on things such as provider, protocol, hop distance, it totally depends... usually a test is required. > On the net, can one bot directly talk to another bot, or does the > communication have to go through some sort of server (other than those > provided gratis on the web, such as DNS servers)? > > If two bots send messages to a third bot at the same time, does the net > infrastructure hold the second of the conflicting messages until the > first > has been received, or what? This is called protocol and there are many - see RFCs and ITU for standards but better ones are custom made. There are connectionless and connection oriented protocols, broadcast, multicast, C/S, P2P, etc.. Existing protocol standards can be extended, piggybacked or parasited. Bots can talk direct or go through a server using or not using DNS. Also depends on topology - is one point (or both) behind a NAT? Message simultaneity handling is dependent on protocol. > To me the big hurdle to achieving the equivalent of SETI-at-home AGI is > getting the bandwidth necessary to allow the interactive computing of > large > amounts of knowledge. If we could solve that problem, then it should be > pretty easy to get some great tests going, such as with something like > OpenCog. Like I was saying before - better to design based on what you have to work with than trying to do something like fit the human brain design on the "unbounded nondeterministic" internet grid. I'm not sure though what the architecture of OpenCog looks like... John ----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?&; ----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=70605995-f456c7
