Good points. I would like to add a further point:

Human language is a sequence of words which is used to transfer patterns of
one brain into another brain.

When we have an AGI which understands and speaks language, then for the
first time there would be an exchange of patterns between an artificial
brain and a human brain.

So human language is not only useful to teach the AGI some stuff. We also
will have an easy access to the toplevel patterns of the AGI when it speaks
to us. Human language will be useful to understand what is going on in the
AGI. This makes testing easier.

-Matthias

 

Ben G wrote 

 

A few points...

1)  
Closely associating embodiment with GOFAI is just flat-out historically
wrong.  GOFAI refers to a specific class of approaches to AI that wer
pursued a few decades ago, which were not centered on embodiment as a key
concept or aspect.  

2)
Embodiment based approaches to AGI certainly have not been extensively tried
and failed in any serious way, simply because of the primitive nature of
real and virtual robotic technology.  Even right now, the real and virtual
robotics tech are not *quite* there to enable us to pursue embodiment-based
AGI in a really tractable way.  For instance, humanoid robots like the Nao
cost $20K and have all sorts of serious actuator problems ... and virtual
world tech is not built to allow fine-grained AI control of agent skeletons
... etc.   It would be more accurate to say that we're 5-15 years away from
a condition where embodiment-based AGI can be tried-out without immense
time-wastage on making not-quite-ready supporting technologies work....

3)
I do not think that humanlike NL understanding nor humanlike embodiment are
in any way necessary for AGI.   I just think that they seem to represent the
shortest path to getting there, because they represent a path that **we
understand reasonably well** ... and because AGIs following this path will
be able to **learn from us** reasonably easily, as opposed to AGIs built on
fundamentally nonhuman principles

To put it simply, once an AGI can understand human language we can teach it
stuff.  This will be very helpful to it.  We have a lot of experience in
teaching agents with humanlike bodies, communicating using human language.
Then it can teach us stuff too.   And human language is just riddled through
and through with metaphors to embodiment, suggesting that solving the
disambiguation problems in linguistics will be much easier for a system with
vaguely humanlike embodied experience.

4)
I have articulated a detailed proposal for how to make an AGI using the OCP
design together with linguistic communication and virtual embodiment.
Rather than just a promising-looking assemblage of in-development
technologies, the proposal is grounded in a coherent holistic theory of how
minds work.

What I don't see in your counterproposal is any kind of grounding of your
ideas in a theory of mind.  That is: why should I believe that loosely
coupling a bunch of clever narrow-AI widgets, as you suggest, is going to
lead to an AGI capable of adapting to fundamentally new situations not
envisioned by any of its programmers?   I'm not completely ruling out the
possiblity that this kind of strategy could work, but where's the beef?  I'm
not asking for a proof, I'm asking for a coherent, detailed argument as to
why this kind of approach could lead to a generally-intelligent mind.

5)
It sometimes feels to me like the reason so little progress is made toward
AGI is that the 2000 people on the planet who are passionate about it, are
moving in 4000 different directions ;-) ... 

OpenCog is an attempt to get a substantial number of AGI enthusiasts all
moving in the same direction, without claiming this is the **only** possible
workable direction.  

Eventually, supporting technologies will advance enough that some smart guy
can build an AGI on his own in a year of hacking.  I don't think we're at
that stage yet -- but I think we're at the stage where a team of a couple
dozen could do it in 5-10 years.  However, if that level of effort can't be
systematically summoned (thru gov't grants, industry funding, open-source
volunteerism or wherever) then maybe AGI won't come about till the
supporting technologies develop further.  My hope is that we can overcome
the existing collective-psychology and practical-economic obstacles that
hold us back from creating AGI together, and build a beneficial AGI ASAP ...

-- Ben G









On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 2:34 AM, David Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 4:39 PM, Brad Paulsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

So, it has, in fact, been tried before.  It has, in fact, always failed.
Your comments about the quality of Ben's approach are noted.  Maybe you're
right.  But, it's not germane to my argument which is that those parts of
Ben G.'s approach that call for human-level NLU, and that propose embodiment
(or virtual embodiment) as a way to achieve human-level NLU, have been tried
before, many times, and have always failed.  If Ben G. knows something he's
not telling us then, when he does, I'll consider modifying my views.  But,
remember, my comments were never directed at the OpenCog project or Ben G.
personally.  They were directed at an AGI *strategy* not invented by Ben G.
or OpenCog.


The OCP approach/strategy, both in crucial specifics of its parts and
particularly in its total synthesis, *IS* novel; I recommend a closer
re-examination!

The mere resemblance of some of its parts to past [failed] AI undertakings
is not enough reason to dismiss those parts, IMHO, dislike of embodiment or
NLU or any other aspect that has a GOFAI past lurking in the wings not
withstanding.

OTOH, I will happily agree to disagree on these points to save the AGI list
from going down in flames! ;-)

-dave

  _____  


agi |  <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> Archives
<https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/> Fehler! Es wurde kein
Dateiname angegeben.|  <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Modify Your
Subscription

 <http://www.listbox.com> Fehler! Es wurde kein Dateiname angegeben.




-- 
Ben Goertzel, PhD
CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC
Director of Research, SIAI
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

"Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections must be first
overcome "  - Dr Samuel Johnson



  _____  


agi |  <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> Archives
<https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/> |
<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;
e> Modify Your Subscription

 <http://www.listbox.com> 

 




-------------------------------------------
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=114414975-3c8e69
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

Reply via email to