On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 12:51 AM, Mark Nuzz <nuzz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 12:16 AM, Ben Goertzel <b...@goertzel.org> wrote: > >> > My opinion on those technologies you mention is that, while novel and >> > promising, they are still in an experimental stage. It's a huge mistake >> to >> > assemble a system composed of multiple experimental or bleeding edge >> > technologies >> >> No it isn't. >> >> Most who try this will fail... >> >> But some subset of those who try this, will be the ones who win the >> prize and make the transformative progress... >> >> We are entering an era of abundance, where conservatism will be less >> and less of a valuable attitude... >> >> ben >> > > This is an important argument and something I hope you can spare the time > for. Yes, most who try will fail but it's not a matter of random chance. > Putting aside the argument about whether resources are truly abundant, > having more resources doesn't change the hard truths about engineering! If > you take several experimental technologies, which are being developed by > third parties, many of whom are not backed by the vast industry resources > of tech 2.0 (Silicon Valley et al), then how is staking your success on > them a valuable attitude? > > Sure, you may have some brilliant people at the company who actually have > it all figured out, with backup plans and so on (do you?). Regardless, does > it make sense to go for maximum publicity if the message only makes sense > to those who don't see possible mistakes being made? Okay, sure, perhaps > they are not mistakes, as I or other skeptics may not be skilled enough to > see the genius behind many of the choices. But in that case, why not go to > the most skeptical place in all of AGI-land, your own e-mail list? This is > the best place to find out what's wrong with any given idea as people often > like to be critics. This discussion was probably long overdue... > > Hyperbole aside, I know that you're optimistic about what it will cost to > develop AGI, but please don't forget to take complexity and unknown > variables (risk) into account. It's not a matter of being conservative, but > rather respecting the fundamental mathematics of complexity and risk as it > applies to engineering (a very different beast from research). It's not > intended to be an attack on you but I want the project to succeed, and to > be frank I've had to mute announcements from the project because half of > them give me anxiety attacks. > Here is a (dated but relevant) book that may provide some insight and evidence behind what I am talking about. Even skimming through it should give an idea... https://www.amazon.com/Software-Engineering-Economics-Barry-Boehm/dp/0138221227 ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T0675edaa61e4f23b-M933b660885b13df548e7321e Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups
