> From: Ben Goertzel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > One possibility would be to more narrowly focus this list, specifically > on **how to make AGI work**. > > > Potentially, there could be another list, something like "agi- > philosophy", devoted to philosophical and weird-physics and other > discussions about whether AGI is possible or not. I am not sure > whether I feel like running that other list ... and even if I ran it, I > might not bother to read it very often. I'm interested in new, > substantial ideas related to the in-principle possibility of AGI, but > not interested at all in endless philosophical arguments over various > peoples' intuitions in this regard. >
I'd go for 2 lists. Sometimes after working intensely on something concrete and specific one wants to step back and theorize. And then particular AGI approaches may be going down the wrong trail and need to step back and look at things from a different perspective. Also there are probably many people that wish to speak up on various topics but are silent due to them not wanting to clutter the main AGI list. I would guess that there are some valuable contributions that need to be made but are not directly related to some particular well-defined applicable subject. You could almost do 3, AGI engineering, science and philosophy. We are all well aware of the philosophical directions the list takes though I see the science and engineering getting a bit too intertwined as well. Although with this sort of thing it's hard to avoid. Even so, with all this the messages in the one list still are grouped by subject... I mean people can parse. But to simplify moderation and organization, etc.. John ------------------------------------------- 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=117534816-b15a34 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
