Valentina Poletti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Got ya, thanks for the clarification. That brings up another question. Why do 
> we want to make an AGI?

I'm glad somebody is finally asking the right question, instead of skipping 
over the specification to the design phase. It would avoid a lot of 
philosophical discussions that result from people having different ideas of 
what AGI should do.

AGI could replace all human labor, worth about US $2 to $5 quadrillion over the 
next 30 years. We should expect the cost to be of this magnitude, given that 
having it sooner is better than waiting.

I think AGI will be immensely complex, on the order of 10^18 bits, 
decentralized, competitive, with distributed ownership, like today's internet 
but smarter. It will converse with you fluently but know too much to pass the 
Turing test. We will be totally dependent on it.

-- Matt Mahoney, [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription: 
https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=111637683-c8fa51
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

Reply via email to