[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 9:45 AM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: [agi] SOTA
Ah, but is a thermostat conscious ?
:-)
On 12/01/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.thermostatshop.com/
Not sure what you've
PROTECTED]
*Sent:* Friday, January 12, 2007 9:45 AM
*To:* agi@v2.listbox.com
*Subject:* Re: [agi] SOTA
Ah, but is a thermostat conscious ?
:-)
On 12/01/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.thermostatshop.com/
Not sure what you've been Googling on but here
Ah, but is a thermostat conscious ?
:-)
On 12/01/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.thermostatshop.com/
Not sure what you've been Googling on but here they are.
There's even one you can call on the telephone
If there's a market for this, then why can't I even
On 1/12/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.thermostatshop.com/
Not sure what you've been Googling on but here they are.
Haven't been googling. But the fact is that I've never actually
/seen/ one in the wild. My point is that the market demand for such
simple and
Philip Goetz wrote:
Haven't been googling. But the fact is that I've never actually
/seen/ one in the wild. My point is that the market demand for such
simple and useful and cheap items is low enough that I've never
actually seen one.
Check any hardware store, there's a whole shelf. I
--- Bob Mottram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah, but is a thermostat conscious ?
:-)
Are humans conscious? It depends on your definition of consciousness, which
is really hard to define.
Does a thermostat want to keep the room at a constant temperature? Or does it
just behave as if that is
On 1/12/07, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Philip Goetz wrote:
Haven't been googling. But the fact is that I've never actually
/seen/ one in the wild. My point is that the market demand for such
simple and useful and cheap items is low enough that I've never
actually seen
On 06/01/07, Gary Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I like the idea of the house being the central AI though and communicating
to
house robots through an wireless encrypted protocol to prevent inadvertant
commands from other systems and hacking.
This is the way it's going to go in my opinion.
it.
Huh? I've never lived in a home without such (nor been aware that they were
rare).
- Original Message -
From: Philip Goetz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 1:29 PM
Subject: Re: [agi] SOTA
On 06/01/07, Gary Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I
On Jan 11, 2007, at 1:29 PM, Philip Goetz wrote:
On 06/01/07, Gary Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is the way it's going to go in my opinion. In a house or
office the
robots would really be dumb actuators - puppets - being controlled
from a
central AI which integrates multiple systems
On Jan 11, 2007, at 10:29 AM, Philip Goetz wrote:
If there's a market for this, then why can't I even buy a thermostat
with a timer on it to turn the temperature down at night and up in the
morning? The most basic home automation, which could have been built
cheaply 30 years ago, is still, if
On 06/01/07, Philip Goetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I worked for a robotics company called Arctec in the early 1980s.
We built a robot called the Gemini. They essentially solved the
navigation problem - in an office-space world. You stuck one small
reflector on both sides of every door, at
The problem wasn't technological. It was that nobody had any use for
a robot. We never figured out what people would want the robot for.
I think that's still the problem.
Phil, I think the real issue is that no one wants an expensive,
stupid, awkward robot...
A broadly functional household
Stanford scientists plan to make a robot capable of performing
everyday tasks, such as unloading the dishwasher.
http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2006/november8/ng-110806.html
On 1/6/07, Benjamin Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The problem wasn't technological. It was that nobody had
Needless to say, I don't consider cleaning up the house a particularly
interesting goal for AGI projects. I can well imagine it being done
by a narrow AI system with no capability to do anything besides
manipulate simple objects, navigate, etc.
Being able to understand natural language commands
On 1/6/07, Benjamin Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Needless to say, I don't consider cleaning up the house a particularly
interesting goal for AGI projects. I can well imagine it being done
by a narrow AI system with no capability to do anything besides
manipulate simple objects, navigate,
On 1/6/07, Bob Mottram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Reflectors have been used on AGVs for quite some time. However, even using
reflectors the robot has no real idea of what its environment looks like.
Most of the time it's flying blind, guessing its way between reflectors,
like a moth navigating
if you think of something while you're away.
-Original Message-
From: Benjamin Goertzel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 11:16 AM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: [agi] SOTA
Needless to say, I don't consider cleaning up the house a particularly
interesting goal
On 06/01/07, Mike Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I really want to see a central traffic computer take driving away from all
the unqualified (or disinterested) drivers on the roads. I'd really like to
see companies get incentives to allow knowledge workers work from home
offices to save
On 06/01/07, Gary Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I like the idea of the house being the central AI though and communicating
to
house robots through an wireless encrypted protocol to prevent inadvertant
commands from other systems and hacking.
This is the way it's going to go in my opinion.
On 1/6/07, Bob Mottram wrote:
This is the way it's going to go in my opinion. In a house or office the
robots would really be dumb actuators - puppets - being controlled from a
central AI which integrates multiple systems together. That way you can
keep the cost and maintenance requirements of
On 10/23/06, Bob Mottram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Grinding my own axe, I also think that stereo vision systems will bring
significant improvements to robotics over the next few years. Being able to
build videogame-like 3D models of the environment in real time is now a
feasible proposition
On 1/6/07, Philip Goetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The problem wasn't technological. It was that nobody had any use for
a robot. We never figured out what people would want the robot for.
I think that's still the problem.
Well, I for one want a job assistant who can fetch things - what
Another recent development is the CMU telepresence robot, which is quite low cost and would be a good place to start. Since it uses a linux based PC there should be plenty of scope for programming more sophisticated applications than Lego would be able to handle.
On 23/10/06, Neil H. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm also pretty surprise that they haven't done anything major withtheir vSLAM tech:http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=1570091
Evolution really failed to capitalise upon their early success. One of their biggest mistakes was to make
On 10/20/06, Richard Loosemore wrote:
I would *love* to see those IBM folks put a couple of jabbering
four-year-old children in front of that translation system, to see how
it likes their 'low-intelligence' language. :-) Does anyone have any
contacts on the team, so we could ask?
I sent an
On 10/24/06, Bob Mottram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 23/10/06, Neil H. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think their stuff was also licenced to Sony for use on their
AIBO, before Sony axed their robotics products.
Sony licensed the tech, but I think they only used it so that AIBO
could visually
Bob and Neil,
Thanks for the informative discussion!
Several questions for you and others who are familiar with robotics:
For people whose interests are mainly in the connection between
sensorimotor and high-level cognition, what kind of API can be
expected in a representative robot? Something
On 24/10/06, Pei Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Any comments on Microsoft Robotics Studio?The microsoft robotics studio is quite an unimpressive release. I had expected to see user friendly IDEs and drag-and-drop function block programming, but there's none of that. About the best I can say is that
Hi,
On 10/24/06, Pei Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Ben,
As you know, though I think AGISim is interesting, I'd rather directly
try the real thing. ;-)
I felt that way too once, and so (in 1996) I did directly try the real
thing. Building a mobile robot and experimenting with it was fun,
I used to be of the opinion that doing robotics in simulation was a waste of
time. The simulations were too perfect. To simplistic compared to the
nitty gritty of real world environments. Algorithms developed and optimised
for simulated environments would not translate well (or at all) into
On 10/23/06, Bob Mottram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Another interesting development is the rise of the use of invariant feature
detection algorithms together with geometric hashing for some kinds of
object recognition. The most notable successes to date have been using
David Lowe's SIFT method,
On 10/23/06, Bob Mottram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's a shame that Evolution Robotics weren't able to develop that system
further. A logical progression would be to extend the geometric hashing to
3D and eventually 4D, although that would require a stereo camera or some
other way of measuring
You can get depth information from single camera motion (eg Andrew Davison's MonoSLAM), but this requires an initial size calibration and continuous tracking. If the tracking is lost at any time you need to recalibrate. This makes single camera systems less practical. With a stereo camera the
On 10/23/06, Bob Mottram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My inside sources tell me that there's little or no software development
going on at Evolution Robotics, and that longstanding issues and bugs remain
unfixed. They did licence their stuff to WoWee, and also Whitebox Robotics,
so its likely we'll
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 22:15:37 -0400, Richard Loosemore wrote
Matt Mahoney wrote:
From: Pei Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 10/20/06, Matt Mahoney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is not that we can't come up with the right algorithms.
It's that we don't have the
computing power to implement
Andrew,
I happen to have a list you asked. Last year I taught a graduate
course on NN (http://www.cis.temple.edu/~pwang/525-NC/CIS525.htm), and
afterwards wrote a paper
(http://nars.wang.googlepages.com/wang.AGI-CNN.pdf) to list its
strength and weakness, with respect to AGI.
In the paper, I
With regard to the computational requirements of AI, there is a very clear
relation showing that the quality of a language model improves by adding time
and memory, as shown in the following table:
http://cs.fit.edu/~mmahoney/compression/text.html
And with the size of the training set, as
On 10/21/06, Matt Mahoney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I read Pei Wang's paper, http://nars.wang.googlepages.com/wang.AGI-CNN.pdf
Some of the shortcomings of neural networks mentioned only apply to classical
(feedforward or symmetric) neural networks, not to asymmetric networks with
recurrent
- Original Message
From: Pei Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2006 5:25:13 PM
Subject: Re: [agi] SOTA
For example, the human mind and some other AI techniques handle
structured knowledge much better than NN does.
Is this because the brain
On 10/21/06, Matt Mahoney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Original Message
From: Pei Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2006 5:25:13 PM
Subject: Re: [agi] SOTA
For example, the human mind and some other AI techniques handle
structured knowledge much
Olie,
I agree with most of your statements, however, history shows that
almost every subfield of AI has enjoyed a rapid progress period
accompanied by optimism, then followed by a long period of slow moving
accompanied by pessimism. Just think about expert system in the early
1980s and neural
BillK wrote:
On 10/19/06, Richard Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry, but IMO large databases, fast hardware, and cheap memory ain't
got nothing to do with it.
Anyone who doubts this get a copy of Pim Levelt's Speaking, read and
digest the whole thing, and then meditate on the fact that
Matt Mahoney wrote:
Sorry, but IMO large databases, fast hardware, and cheap memory ain't
got nothing to do with it.
Yes it does. The human brain has vastly more computing power,
memory and knowledge than all the computers we have been doing AI
experiments on. We have been searching for
It is entirely possible to build an AI in such a way that the general
course of its behavior is as reliable as the behavior of an Ideal Gas:
can't predict the position and momentum of all its particles, but you sure
can predict such overall characteristics as temperature, pressure and
volume.
BillK wrote:
On 10/20/06, Richard Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For you to blithely say Most normal speaking requires relatively little
'intelligence' is just mind-boggling.
I am not trying to say that language skills don't require a human
level of intelligence. That's obvious. That is
- Original Message
From: Richard Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2006 10:14:09 AM
Subject: Re: [agi] SOTA
We have been searching for decades to find shortcuts to fit our
machines? When you send a child into her bedroom to search
Bill, Richard, etc,
Children don't have a great grasp of language, but they have all the
sensory and contextual mechanisms to learn a language by causal
interaction with their environment. Semantics are a learned system,
just as words are. In current AI we're programming semantic rules into
a
I want to strongly agree with Richard on several points here, and
expand on them a bit in light of later discussion.
On 10/20/06, Richard Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It used to be a standing joke in AI that researchers would claim there
was nothing wrong with their basic approach, they
On 10/19/06, Olie Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For instance, the soccer-bots get better every year, cars can now finish
DARPA grand challenge -like events in reasonable time... (I personally
think that we're fast approaching a critical point where the technology is
just good enough to attract
On 10/20/06, Josh Treadwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The resembling system is only capable of processing information based on
algorithms, and not reworking an algorithm based on the reasoning for
executing the function.
This appears to be the same argument Spock made in an old Star Trek
On 10/19/06, Peter Voss [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm often asked about state-of-the-art in AI, and would like to get some
opinions.
What do you regard, or what is generally regarded as SOTA in the various AI
aspects that may be, or may be seen to be relevant to AGI?
- NLP components such as
- Original Message
From: Pei Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2006 3:35:57 PM
Subject: Re: [agi] SOTA
On 10/20/06, Matt Mahoney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is not that we can't come up with the right algorithms. It's that we
don't have
Philip Goetz wrote:
On 10/20/06, Josh Treadwell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
The resembling system is only capable of processing information based
on
algorithms, and not reworking an algorithm based on the reasoning for
executing the function.
This appears to be the same
Matt Mahoney wrote:
From: Pei Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 10/20/06, Matt Mahoney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is not that we can't come up with the right algorithms.
It's that we don't have the
computing power to implement them.
Can you give us an example? I hope you don't mean
justin corwin wrote:
It is entirely possible to build an AI in such a way that the general
course of its behavior is as reliable as the behavior of an Ideal Gas:
can't predict the position and momentum of all its particles, but you
sure can predict such overall characteristics as temperature,
Peter,
I'm afraid that your question cannot be answered as it is. AI is
highly fragmented, which not only means that few project is aiming at
the whole field, but also that few is even covering a subfield as you
listed. Instead, each project usually aims at a special problem under
a set of
- Comprehensive (common-sense) knowledge-bases and/or ontologies
Cyc/OpenCyc, Wordnet, etc. but there seems to be no good way for applications
to use this information and no good alternative to hand coding knowledge.
- Inference engines, etc.
- Adaptive expert systems
A dead end. There has
On 10/19/06, Matt Mahoney wrote:
- NLP components such as parsers, translators, grammar-checkers
Parsing is unsolved. Translators like Babelfish have progressed little since
the 1959
Russian-English project. Microsoft Word's grammar checker catches some mistakes
but is clearly not AI.
Hi Peter,
I think in all of the categories you listed, thereshould be a lot ofprogress, but they will hit a ceiling because of the lack of an AGI architecture.
It is very clear that vision requires AGI to be complete. So does NLP. In vision, many objects require reasoning to recognize.NLP also
- Original Message
From: BillK [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2006 11:43:46 AM
Subject: Re: [agi] SOTA
On 10/19/06, Matt Mahoney wrote:
- NLP components such as parsers, translators, grammar-checkers
Parsing is unsolved. Translators like
Matt Mahoney wrote:
From: BillK [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Parsing is unsolved. Translators like Babelfish have progressed little since
the 1959
Russian-English project. Microsoft Word's grammar checker catches some mistakes
but is clearly not AI.
I think the problem will eventually be solved.
On 10/19/06, Richard Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry, but IMO large databases, fast hardware, and cheap memory ain't
got nothing to do with it.
Anyone who doubts this get a copy of Pim Levelt's Speaking, read and
digest the whole thing, and then meditate on the fact that that book is
(Excellent list there, Matt)Although Pei Wang makes a good point that the fragmentation of AI does make it difficult to compare projects, it is interesting+ to note the huge differences in the movements in different narrow-AI fields.
As has already been mentioned, it is interesting+ to compare the
I'm often asked about state-of-the-art in AI, and would like to get some
opinions.
What do you regard, or what is generally regarded as SOTA in the various AI
aspects that may be, or may be seen to be relevant to AGI?
For example:
- Comprehensive (common-sense) knowledge-bases and/or
AMD demonstrates the first x86 dual-core processor
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20040831PR200.html
Confirms it will re-use the current Opteron 940-pin socket
--
Brian Atkins
Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
http://www.singinst.org/
---
To unsubscribe, change your address, or
Opteron system are definitely the sweet spot currently, and for the near
future. Rumors are that major server companies are working on 32-way
systems to be released soon. Also of course Cray bought that OctigaBay
company and now has this:
http://www.cray.com/products/systems/xd1/
Also rumor
David Hart wrote:
Because the memory controller resides on the CPU in
Opteron systems, all 8 CPUs must be populated, but
this can be achieved with the slowest/cheapest model,
the Opteron 840 (1.4 GHz).
I would second using the cheapest CPU part available, which currently is
the 1.6GHz
Shane wrote:
As for more indirect solutions like RAM disks... I think you would
loose at least a factor of ten in speed compared to simply accessing
system memory directly as you would need to go through the file system
and out to an external device with RAM in it pretending to be a disk.
If
Flash memories could not be used as memory - they withstand no more than
100.000 rewrites. (I do not recall this properly it could be even less
then 10.000)
Milon
Lukasz Kaiser wrote:
Hi.
Given that your core system is C# this could be a bit of a problem.
Just to put my 2c, if you
]
Behalf Of Shane
Sent: Friday, August 20, 2004 9:57 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [agi] SOTA 50 GB memory for Windows
Well I guess I have become skeptical about when they will
release such a thing as they have been saying that they will
put out a 64 bit version for Intel for years now
What are the best options for large amounts of fast memory for Windows-based
systems?
I'm looking for price performance (access time) for:
1) Cached RAID
2) RAM disks
3) Internal RAM (using 64 bit architecture?)
4) other
Thanks for any info.
Peter
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
I'm looking for price performance (access time) for:
1) Cached RAID
This will be useless for runtime VM or pseudo-VM purposes. RAID cache
isolates the application from write burst bottlenecks when syncing disks
(e.g. checkpointing transaction logs), but that's about it. For flatter
I/O
seems to
max out at 8Gb)
Peter
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of J. Andrew Rogers
Sent: Friday, August 20, 2004 2:12 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [agi] SOTA 50 GB memory for Windows
I'm looking for price performance (access time
I didn't realize that RAID cache doesn't help on reads (like RAM disks
do).
Yeah, a lot of people have never really thought about it much. I've
worked with database servers for years though, where we actually tuned
that type of hardware.
The main difference is that a write doesn't return a
Peter,
In terms of hardware as far as I know the biggest PC style hardware
you can buy supports 32 GB of RAM. For example you can by PCs this
big from people like www.penguincomputing.com
However there isn't a 64 bit version of Windows on the market nor will
there be for some time. Thus your
Microsoft Updates 64-bit Windows XP Preview Editions
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1637471,00.asp
Peter
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Shane
. However there isn't a 64 bit version of Windows on the market nor will
there be
Hi.
Given that your core system is C# this could be a bit of a problem.
Just to put my 2c, if you should have the idea to try .NET under linux,
better first do some tests. In my experience the linux .NET runtime (mono),
although almost fully compatible, is about 5-10 time slower than that on
78 matches
Mail list logo
