On 6/6/07, Peter Voss [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
'fraid not. Have to look after our investors' interests… (and, like Ben, I'm
not keen for AGI technology to be generally available)
But at least Novamente makes a convinceable amount of their ideas
available IMHO.
P.S. Probabilistic Logic
Didnt know about LIDA, so a quick search brought up
http://www.agiri.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=44
Which is a general list of many different AGI projects, of use to many of us
here.
This appears to be the main IDA pages,
http://ccrg.cs.memphis.edu/projects.html
but I dont see where they
IDA, a Conscious Artifact?
http://ccrg.cs.memphis.edu/assets/papers/IDA-ConsciousArtifact.pdf
Seesm to be an intersting discussion of the Model and consciousness of the
project.
James Ratcliff
Lukasz Stafiniak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/7/07, Benjamin Goertzel wrote:
Sure, but the
There're several reasons why AGI teams are fragmented and AGI designers
don't want to join a consortium:
A. believe that one's own AGI design is superior
B. want to ensure that the global outcome of AGI is friendly
C. want to get bigger financial rewards
(A) does not really prevent a founder
I think Novamente's current mode of operation is pretty much semi-open
already (since so many have worked there) and is just a small step from
using my consortium idea -- if Ben is willing to give up complete control of
his AGI design
YKY
YKY --
As you are writing about my own
On 06/06/07, YKY (Yan King Yin) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There're several reasons why AGI teams are fragmented and AGI designers
don't want to join a consortium:
A. believe that one's own AGI design is superior
B. want to ensure that the global outcome of AGI is friendly
C. want to get
YKY writes:
There're several reasons why AGI teams are
fragmented and AGI designers don't want to
join a consortium:
A. believe that one's own AGI design is superior
B. want to ensure that the global outcome of AGI is friendly
C. want to get bigger financial rewards
D. There are
On 6/6/07, Derek Zahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
D. There are no consortiums to join.
I see talk about joining Novamente, but are they hiring? It might be
possible to volunteer to work on peripheral things like AGISIM, but I sort
of doubt that Ben is eager to train volunteers on the AGI-type
Peter Voss: Our goal is to create full AGI...
Do you have a proof-of-concept to use your term?
Hawkins has a simple one for his HTM - he shows his system can recognize
objects from simple line drawings. That simple will do to begin with..
Novamente, from what I've seen, doesn't have one -
Hi Ben and Peter Voss,
I understand that transitioning to a Web 2.0-style will not be easy for
well-established projects. But sometimes a company needs to cannibalize its
own past...
Due to the fewer number of employees, conventional companies can only
explore a small subspace of the huge AGI
On 6/7/07, William Pearson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is also
D. The other members of the consortiums philosophical approaches to
AGI share little in common with your own and the time spent trying to
communicate with the consortium about which class of system to
investigate would be better
On 6/6/07, Peter Voss [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
Our goal is to create full AGI, but our business plan is to commercialize
an
intermediate-level AGI engine via some highly lucrative applications. Our
target date to commence commercialization is the end of next year.
Peter Voss
a2i2
The
'fraid not. Have to look after our investors' interests. (and, like Ben, I'm
not keen for AGI technology to be generally available)
_
From: Kingma, D.P. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 1:28 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: [agi] about AGI designers
Mike, putting together a demo of a machine learning system recognizing
objects from simple line drawings would take me less than one month, using
textbook technologies. Not worthwhile. Putting together a simple
reinforcement learning system doing the same stuff as NM does in that fetch
video
Ben,
I'd be looking for a totally different proof-of-concept for AGI. (I brought in
Hawkins - not to rehash our arguments - because I consider him an example of
good proof-of-concept practice).
I'd be looking for proof of higher adaptivity (to use Peter's term). If Peter
Voss' Maze Explorer
Sure, but the nature of AGI is that wizzy demos are likely to come fairly
late in the development process. All of us actively working in the field
understand this
-- Ben G
On 6/6/07, Mike Tintner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ben,
I'd be looking for a totally different proof-of-concept for
On 6/7/07, Benjamin Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sure, but the nature of AGI is that wizzy demos are likely to come fairly
late in the development process. All of us actively working in the field
understand this
What about LIDA? Even if she is not very general she is more
cognitive
17 matches
Mail list logo
