Hi all,
I'm curious about the general sentiments that people have
about the appropriate level of openness for an AGI project.
My mind certainly isn't made up on the issue and I can see
reasons for going either way. If a single individual or
small group of people made a sudden break through in
Shane,
I fully agree with what you said.
My own plan for NARS is to publish the logic it used in detail (including
the grammar of its formal language, the semantics, the inference rules with
their truth-value functions), but, at the current time, not to reveal the
technical details of the
Shane,
I have also considered using massively distributed processing a la [EMAIL PROTECTED]
for Novamente; but in a Novamente context, this issue is not closely tied to
open-ness.
This is because we could use massively distributed processing for aspects of
Novamente cognition, without releasing
I understand that you are not specifically talking about
open source, but as the auther of several open source
visualization systems (including Vis5D, which was probably
the first open source visualization system) I want to
point out that there is a real opportunity for someone who
starts an open
Bill,
I'd definitely see creating the first open source AGI system as a big
opportunity.
Do you see any overwhelming risks in making AGI technology available
to everyone including malcontents and criminals? Would the rest of
society be able to handle these risks if they also had access to
Shane,
In your first posting on the open AGI subject you mentioned that you
were concerned about the risk on the one hand of:
* inordinate power being concentrated in the hands of the controllers
of the first advanced AGI
* power to do serious harm being made widely available if AGI
Shane wrote:
I see that you run sort of an intermediate approach here, as does Pei.
Peter takes a more closed approach with A2I2, which probably reflects
his background in business rather than academia. Others like James
Rogers take a very closed approach; in fact I don't think I have ever
Hi Bill
Being in your position (namely age wise), I would agree open source is the
way to go particularly if someone could put together some lucid
requirements, objectives and some substantial key seed ideas and/or models
to get the ball rolling.
Gus
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
Hi all,
The Novamente project is seeking volunteers again ;-)
The last time I actively sought volunteers, in 2002, what
happened was that out of about 15 people who expressed interest, four people
ended up making contributions, and one ended up making highly significant
contributions
