My email is mindpixel at proton male daht Kahm.

Hopefully all but the minimally intelligent bots out there don’t pick up on my 
address.

But I’ll let you all know if I can find the source or not. It wouldn’t take 
long to rewrite it, though. I’ll share the github link when I can.

Sent from ProtonMail Mobile

On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 5:52 PM, Jeremy Owen Turner via AGI 
<[email protected]> wrote:

> Hello everyone,
>
> I have been passively reading the correspondence between all of the authors. 
> I do not have anything to add to this group at this point and I am not taking 
> any sides. I am just taking in all of your ideas into consideration for now. 
> I personally think that some kind of hybrid approach  between all of these 
> cognitive engineering paradigms will eventually unlock AGI capabilities.
>
> Apologies to posting this email to the whole group. My intention was to 
> contact MP directly but I did not see a direct email for MP.
>
> MP, I would like to read more about MINT (papers, proposals, documentation, 
> code etc.)...Have there been any toy or real implementations of a MINT-agent 
> yet - virtual or otherwise? Is this something like MC-AIXI but even more 
> diluted in its intellectual capabilities and reach?
>
> Many thanks,
> Jeremy
>
> On Sat, Jun 9, 2018 at 10:56 AM, MP via AGI <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> My model is a genetic algorithm system based on AIXI. It’s a really lame 
>> solution to AGI, being naive and brute force, but it’s something small and 
>> simple any computer can run.
>>
>> I call it MINT - for minimal intelligence.
>>
>> I really should dig up the old java source... it’s a neat little system.
>>
>> Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 9, 2018 at 11:55 AM, Matt Mahoney via AGI <[email protected]> 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Like everyone else on this list, I do not have a working AGI. It is easy to 
>>> underestimate the enormity of the problem. The most obvious application of 
>>> AGI is to automate human labor. Globally this is a USD $75 trillion per 
>>> year problem. A working solution would have a ROI of world GDP divided by 
>>> market interest rates, about $1 quadrillion. When investors won't even put 
>>> in $1 million into your project, they are effectively setting odds of a 
>>> billion to one against your success. When you count the number of false 
>>> promises and failures to solve AI since the 1950's, that's not 
>>> unreasonable. It's not that I haven't tried. Ten years ago I proposed an 
>>> AGI composed of billions of narrow AI specialists and a distributed index 
>>> to route your requests to the right agents. Building this would require a 
>>> global effort over decades and an economic infrastructure that rewards 
>>> providing useful services in a hostile and competitive distributed 
>>> computing environment. Agents would compete for attention and reputation in 
>>> a world where information has negative value. The distributed index 
>>> provides a message posting service, where all messages are public, signed 
>>> and dated and cannot be edited or deleted once posted, and are routed to 
>>> anyone who might care. You can find the proposal at 
>>> http://mattmahoney.net/agi2.html Such a project is far beyond what one 
>>> person or even a large company could accomplishment. A human brain sized 
>>> neural network with 10^14 synapses and 10 ms clock would require 10 
>>> petaflops and about 1 petabyte of RAM. Such computers exist but require 
>>> over 1 megawatt of electricity, compared to about 20 watts for the human 
>>> brain. You would need 7 billion of these computers to replace 7 billion 
>>> workers, requiring 7000 terawatts of power. Global energy production is 
>>> currently 15 TW. This kind of power reduction is not going to be achieved 
>>> by further shrinking transistors, which are already close to the limits of 
>>> physics. It will require computing by moving atoms and molecules rather 
>>> than electrons, something that biology has already figured out but is still 
>>> a long way off for us. Perhaps there are more efficient solutions to AGI. 
>>> Sure, for some problems, like arithmetic. But deep neural networks are 
>>> still the best we have for vision and probably language. The problem is 
>>> that intelligence (measured by reward or prediction accuracy) over a wide 
>>> range of problems increases logarithmically with CPU time and memory 
>>> because the problems themselves have a power law distribution over 
>>> difficulty. This clearly shows as the economy grows linearly while 
>>> computing power grows exponentially. It shows in my own work in data 
>>> compression as a measure of natural language prediction accuracy. The two 
>>> graphs in http://mattmahoney.net/dc/text.html are 10 years old but the 
>>> relationship hasn't changed. Ambitious, decades long AGI projects like 
>>> OpenCog and NARS are knowledge representation frameworks with empty 
>>> knowledge bases and inadequate hardware to solve any useful problems even 
>>> if they were populated. Why? Because software is easy and human knowledge 
>>> collection is hard. The design complexity of the human body cannot exceed 
>>> the compressed information content of our DNA, which I estimated to be 300 
>>> million lines of code. (These numbers from my 2013 paper "The Cost of AI" 
>>> published in 2017 as a chapter in "Philosophy of Mind: Contemporary 
>>> Perspective" (Curado, Gouveia eds). http://mattmahoney.net/costofai.pdf ). 
>>> This is doable for $30 billion, a tiny, insignificant fraction of the total 
>>> cost. Knowledge collection is much harder. Human long term memory capacity 
>>> is 10^9 bits, of which 1% is unique to you and can only be extracted by 
>>> speech or typing at 7 bits per second costing $5 per hour at global average 
>>> wage rates. This is only practical (and still costing hundreds of trillions 
>>> to collect 10^17 bits) by giving up privacy and publishing your personal 
>>> data. Otherwise you are stuck with endless surveys and repeating the same 
>>> data over and over. How many times today did you have to type in just basic 
>>> info like your name or email? Hoping to stimulate some intelligent 
>>> discussion. -- -- Matt Mahoney, [email protected] 
>>> ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence 
>>> List: AGI Permalink: 
>>> https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T731509cdd81e3f5f-Mb45fd1f76d6ed4014a05cc4f
>>>  Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups
>
> [Artificial General Intelligence List](https://agi.topicbox.com/latest) / AGI 
> / see [discussions](https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi) + 
> [participants](https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/members) + [delivery 
> options](https://agi.topicbox.com/groups) 
> [Permalink](https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T943a4c6b8d2be614-M05c9958a8642ed0691cc670f)
------------------------------------------
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T943a4c6b8d2be614-M95e27e631956118babd94900
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups

Reply via email to