> * > d) 75 years of computer-based-AGI failure - has sent me a message that no > amount of hubris on my part can overcome. As a scientist I must be informed > by empirical outcomes, not dogma or wishful thinking. > > * >
That argument really is a foolish one not worth paying attention to. I mean, it could turn out that computer-based AGI is impossible, but it's *so* obvious that our failure to achieve this so far proves nothing about this. Once we have computers that are powerful enough to simulate the brain at the molecular level ... and detailed understanding of brain structure and dynamics at that level ... *then*, if we simulate the brain at that level on a computer and it fails to be intelligent, there will be *empirical* reason to seriously consider the hypothesis that computer-based AGI is impossible. Not until then. -- Ben G ------------------------------------------- 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=123753653-47f84b Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
