Re: [agi] The problem with AGI per Sloman
Colin, Thanks. Do you have access to any of the full articles? I can't make too informed comments about the quality of work of all the guys writing for this journal, but they're certainly raising v. important questions - and this journal appears to have been unjustly ignored by this group. Sloman, for example, seems to be exploring again the idea of a metaprogram (or I'd say, general program vs specialist program), wh. is the core of AGI, as Ben appears to be only v. recently starting to acknowledge: A methodology for making progress is summarised and a novel requirement proposed for a theory of how human minds work: the theory should support a single generic design for a learning, developing system From: Colin Hales Sent: Friday, June 25, 2010 4:30 AM To: agi Subject: Re: [agi] The problem with AGI per Sloman Not sure if this might be fodder for the discussion. The International Journal of Machine Consciousness (IJMC) has just issued Vol 2 #1 here: http://www.worldscinet.com/ijmc/02/0201/S17938430100201.html It has a Sloman article and invited commentary on it. cheers colin hales agi | Archives | Modify Your Subscription --- 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=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
[agi] AGI Alert: DARPA wants quintillion-speed computers
http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/62808 http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/62808Self aware system software, including operating system, runtime system, I/O system, system management/administration, resource management and means of exposing resources, and external environments -- Carlos A Mejia Taking life one singularity at a time. www.Transalchemy.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=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
[agi] Re: AGI Alert: DARPA wants quintillion-speed computers
Omnipresent High Performance Computing (OHPC) initiative) Seriously DARPA we already get it. ;-) On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 1:22 PM, The Wizard key.unive...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/62808 http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/62808Self aware system software, including operating system, runtime system, I/O system, system management/administration, resource management and means of exposing resources, and external environments -- Carlos A Mejia Taking life one singularity at a time. www.Transalchemy.com -- Carlos A Mejia Taking life one singularity at a time. www.Transalchemy.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=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Questions for an AGI
I hope I don't miss represent him but I agree with Ben (at least my interpretation) when he said, We can ask it questions like, 'how can we make a better A(G)I that can serve us in more different ways without becoming dangerous'...It can help guide us along the path to a positive singularity. I'm pretty sure he was also saying at first it should just be a question answering machine with a reliable goal system and stop the development if it has an unstable one before it gets to smart. I like the idea that we should create an automated cross disciplinary scientist and engineer (if you even separate the two) and that NLP not modeled after the human brain is the best proposal for a benevolent and resourceful super intelligence that enables a positive singularity and all its unforeseen perks. On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 11:04 PM, The Wizard key.unive...@gmail.com wrote: If you could ask an AGI anything, what would you ask it? -- Carlos A Mejia Taking life one singularity at a time. www.Transalchemy.com *agi* | Archives https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ | Modifyhttps://www.listbox.com/member/?;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=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Questions for an AGI
One of the first things in AGI is to produce software which is self monitoring and which will correct itself when it is not working. For over a day now I have been unable to access Google Groups. The Internet access simply loops and does not get anywhere. If Google had any true AGI it would :- a) Spot that it was looping. b) Failing that it would provide the use with an interface which would enable the fault to be corrected on line. This may seem an absolutely trivial point, but I feel it is absolutely fundamental. First of all you do not pass the Turing test by being absolutely dumb. I suppose you might say that conversing with Google was rather like Tony Haywood answering questions in Congress. Sorry we cannot process your request at this time (or any other time for that matter). You don't either (this is Google Translate for you) by saying hat US forces have committed atrocities in Burma when they have been out of SE Asia since the end of the Vietnam war. Another instance. Google denied access to my site saying that I had breached the terms and conditions. I hadn't and they said they did not know why. You do not pass the TT either by walking up and saying they had a paedophile website when they hadn't. I would say that the first task of AGI (this is actually a definition) would be to provide software that is fault tolerant and self correcting. After all if we have 2 copies of AGI we will have (by definition) a fault tolerant system. If a request cannot be processed an AGI system should know why not and hopefully be able to do something about it. The lack of any real fault tolerance in our systems to me underlines just how far off we really are. - Ian Parker On 24 June 2010 07:10, Dana Ream dmr...@sonic.net wrote: How do you work? -- *From:* The Wizard [mailto:key.unive...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, June 23, 2010 11:05 PM *To:* agi *Subject:* [agi] Questions for an AGI If you could ask an AGI anything, what would you ask it? -- Carlos A Mejia Taking life one singularity at a time. www.Transalchemy.com *agi* | Archives https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ | Modifyhttps://www.listbox.com/member/?;Your Subscription http://www.listbox.com *agi* | Archives https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ | Modifyhttps://www.listbox.com/member/?;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=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] The problem with AGI per Sloman
But there is some other kind of problem. We should have figured it out by now. I believe that there must be some fundamental computational problem that is standing as the major obstacle to contemporary AGI. Without solving that problem we are going to have to wade through years of incremental advances. I believe that the most likely basis of the problem is efficient logical satisfiability. It makes the most senese given the nature of the computer and the nature of the best theories of mind. I think there must be a computational or physical/computational problem we have yet to clearly identify that goes along with an objection certain philosophers like Chalmers have made about neural correlates, roughly: why should one level of analysis or type of structure (eg neurons, brain regions, dynamically synchronized ensembles of neurons, or even the organism-environment system), have this magic property of consciousness? Since to me at least it seem obvious that the ecological level is the relevant level of analysis at which to find the meaning relevant to biological organisms, my sense is that we can reduce the above problem to a question about meaning/significance, that is: what is it about a system that makes it unified/integrated such that its relationship to other things constitutes a landscape of relevant meaning to the system as a whole. I think that if that an explanation of meaning-to-a-system is either the same as an explanation of first-hand subjectivity, or is closely tied to it, though if subjectivity turns out to be part of a physical problem and not a purely computational one, then we probably won't solve the above-posed problem without such a physical explanation being clarified (not necessarily explained though, just as we don't know what electricity really is for example). All computer software and situated robots that have ever been made are composed of actions or expressions that are meaningful to people, but software or robots have never been created that can refer to their own actions in a way that demonstrates skillful knowledge indicating that they are organized in a truly semantic way, as opposed to a merely programmatic way. --- 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=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] The problem with AGI per Sloman
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 7:35 PM, rob levy r.p.l...@gmail.com wrote: I think there must be a computational or physical/computational problem we have yet to clearly identify that goes along with an objection certain philosophers like Chalmers have made about neural correlates, roughly: why should one level of analysis or type of structure (eg neurons, brain regions, dynamically synchronized ensembles of neurons, or even the organism-environment system), have this magic property of consciousness? I don't think that it will be understood fully during our lifetimes. And I don't think that the unknown aspects of this is relevant to computer programming. However, the question of subjective meaning is very relevant. rob levy r.p.l...@gmail.com wrote: what is it about a system that makes it unified/integrated such that its relationship to other things constitutes a landscape of relevant meaning to the system as a whole. I think that if that an explanation of meaning-to-a-system is either the same as an explanation of first-hand subjectivity, or is closely tied to it, though if subjectivity turns out to be part of a physical problem and not a purely computational one, then we probably won't solve the above-posed problem without such a physical explanation being clarified (not necessarily explained though, just as we don't know what electricity really is for example). That is interesting. I wonder if there is a way to make that sense of subjectivity and subjective meaning a basic quality of a simple AGI program, and if it could be a valuable elemental method of analyzing the IO data environment. I think objectives are an important method of testing ideas (and idea-like impressions and reactions). And this combination of setting objectives to test ideas and further develop new ideas does seem to lend itself to developing a sense of subjective experience in relation to the 'objects' of the IO data environment. --- 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=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
