Thanks Ben. Clearly explained and understood. In my conclusion, except for the processing and storage constraints of physical architectures, tacit knowledge is generally not restricted in development by physical boundaries. When an argument is thus raised against sustainable, self-recursive improvement, and said argument is from a physical constraint perspective, then obviously the constraint is being introduced as the primary factor and would be valid. But just because asking an incorrect question and returning a valid answer, does not make the answer reliable.
I would contend how, from a purely tacit-knowledge engineering perspective, such physical constraints are not determinant. Knowledge growth and obsolescence are not factors of physical architectures, but of environmental application. Suppose then we could let quantum forces in the universe process tacit knowledge to the highest level of abstraction thought possible, let's assume 16 levels of complexity, and light atoms could be used for endless storage, where would the constraint lie? In other words, for AGI, the world probably need radical technology improvement of a quantum kind to be able to process the basis of universal tacit knowledge. The universe is argued to be infinite and all sensing, it "knows" via vibrational connectedness. It is a singularity, for it is whole, one, and independent. What resides in that singularity as data is potential, tacit knowledge. Our ability to access , process, and store that information in a computational model is the only limit. Human intelligence is the limit. As such, radical rethinking is the least of the requirements. Thinking in unreasoning terms, in cosmic terms, would be key to removing the physical and mental (in the sense of physical) boundaries researchers impose upon themselves via convention, or by proxy of very-simple tools at our disposal. What concerns me as member of humankind is how we are sitting here debating stuff into impossibility, when in fact there are companies who are rapidly developing quantum-based, AI capabilities. Anyone may connect with the cosmic singularity, but not everyone would know how to. Our constraint is our lack of knowledge and knowhow, our tacit restrictiveness. We need to open our minds and enlighten it via emerging scientific potential and endless possibilities. Is that a radical-enough thought? Well, I think it should not be. Perhaps, that should be the starting point for research into AGI. Robert Benjamin ________________________________ From: Ben Goertzel <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, 11 February 2019 2:21 AM To: AGI Subject: Re: [agi] The future of AGI I'm thinking a combination of 1 (a DAO) and 4 (self-replicating robots, robot factories that make more robots, etc.).... with artificial scientist/engineering capability that can discover new kinds of machinery and new theories of the behavior of various manifestations of mass/energy A flourishing SingularityNET with its digital tentacles into IoT, intelligent control systems for factories, etc. could provide the start for this. Fortunately we're aiming to inject SingularityNET with a compassion-oriented value system ;) Again, it's not a matter of the first strongly self-modifying / self-improving AGI being smaller than human civilization... it's a matter of such an AGI leveraging human civilization toward its own growth and improvement, as a way of getting the first stages of its recursive self-improvement going... Of course -- if current physics is accurate -- the expansion of a self-improving AGI will be limited by physical law, the Bekenstein bound, etc. But these limits are far beyond the scope of human-level intelligence... ben On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 8:01 AM Matt Mahoney <[email protected]> wrote: > > I'm not sure what kind of "radical" self improving system you have in mind > that is smaller than human civilization and uses it's resources to grow > exponentially. Some examples come to mind: > > 1. A corporation that re-invests its profits by buying computers and hiring > people to operate them. > > 2. A computer virus or worm. > > 3. A genetically engineered pathogen or parasite. > > 4. Self-replicating robots. > > All of these will stop growing when they use up the resources of the > environment that supports them. > > How would you classify a self improving AGI? By what mechanism would it > acquire computing power or the resources (atoms and energy) it needs to grow? > > On Sat, Feb 9, 2019, 9:26 PM Ben Goertzel <[email protected] wrote: >> >> *** >> Suppose you assembled 1000 of the smartest people in the world into a >> village and cut it off from the rest of the world. No travel in or >> out. Disconnected from the power grid and internet except internally. >> How fast could this group implement AGI, having to build its own >> computers using only materials on hand, as well as grow their own food >> and supply their basic needs? >> >> Suppose you (an expert on AGI) were the only living human on Earth. >> All products of civilization like buildings, roads, vehicles, >> machinery, books, tools, etc did not exist. You had to hunt and forage >> for food and find shelter in the wild. How fast could you develop AGI? >> >> Do you see why human level intelligence is insufficient for recursive >> self improvement? >> *** >> >> But AGI is not growing in a vacuum, it's able to leverage the tools >> of human civilization, and the Global Brain of humans and computers >> and other devices that exist right now etc. >> >> Leveraging all these existing resources, the right algorithm using >> relatively modest resources may be able to make the leap to radical >> recursive self-improvement >> >> The question is what small tweak/addition to the current Global Brain could >> let it serve as the launching-pad for the next phase, the recursively >> self-improving superintelligence... >> >> -- Ben >> >> On Sun, Feb 10, 2019 at 2:46 AM Matt Mahoney <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > On Sat, Feb 9, 2019 at 5:31 AM Ben Goertzel <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > *** >> > > First, the threshold for recursive self improvement is not human level >> > > intelligence, but human civilization level intelligence. That's higher >> > > by a factor of 7 billion. >> > > *** >> > > >> > > Obviously this is an upper bound... an AGI engineered for recursive >> > > self-improvement could potentially do it with much less resources than >> > > this... >> > >> > Imagine that a developed country like China or the USA or Singapore >> > (for example) closed its borders, cut off all international trade and >> > internet traffic and then tried to implement AGI. How much would this >> > slow it down? >> > >> > Suppose you assembled 1000 of the smartest people in the world into a >> > village and cut it off from the rest of the world. No travel in or >> > out. Disconnected from the power grid and internet except internally. >> > How fast could this group implement AGI, having to build its own >> > computers using only materials on hand, as well as grow their own food >> > and supply their basic needs? >> > >> > Suppose you (an expert on AGI) were the only living human on Earth. >> > All products of civilization like buildings, roads, vehicles, >> > machinery, books, tools, etc did not exist. You had to hunt and forage >> > for food and find shelter in the wild. How fast could you develop AGI? >> > >> > Do you see why human level intelligence is insufficient for recursive >> > self improvement? >> > >> > > *** >> > > Second is Eroom's Law. The price of new drugs doubles every 9 years. >> > > Global life expectancy has been increasing 0.2 years per year since >> > > the early 1900's, but that rate has slowed a bit since 1990. Testing >> > > new medical treatment is expensive because testing requires human >> > > subjects and the value of human life is increasing as the economy >> > > grows. >> > > *** >> > > >> > > This will be busted when we get sufficiently accurate systems biology >> > > simulation models. But in any case it's an obstacle to bio research not >> > > to AGI... >> > >> > We do not have any programs that input a chemical formula (like H2O) >> > and compute chemical properties (like the freezing point of water) by >> > modeling the interactions of atoms. The reason is that the computation >> > requires solving Schrodinger's equation for n particles, which runs in >> > exponential time in n on a non quantum computer. I suppose it is >> > possible in theory to model the 10^28 atoms in a human body to predict >> > the effects of new medical interventions. But that technology is far >> > away, and even then we can't expect a quantum computer to run faster >> > than the process it is modeling. For now we can't even answer basic >> > questions, like whether calorie restriction extends life in humans, >> > because for one thing the experiments take so long to run. >> > >> > > *** >> > > Third, Moore's Law doesn't cover software or knowledge collection, two >> > > of the three components of AGI (the other being hardware). Human >> > > knowledge collection is limited to how fast you can communicate, about >> > > 150 words per minute per person. >> > > *** >> > > >> > > This obviously makes no sense. E.g. modern face recognition AI gained >> > > knowledge >> > > much faster than this, by sucking up a lot of photos all at once. Once >> > > NLP is >> > > sufficiently solved, AI will be able to suck up a lot of knowledge by >> > > reading the Web. >> > > It won't need knowledge to be explicitly typed in for it. >> > >> > All of the written knowledge on the internet was either typed in or >> > spoken at some point. It still makes up less than 1% of the human >> > knowledge that an AGI would need to model the economy, to know what >> > you want without having to explicitly ask for it. You don't have a >> > robot that will clean your house because it wouldn't know whether a >> > magazine on the floor belongs on the table or in the trash. In the >> > time it takes you to tell it, you could have picked it up yourself. It >> > doesn't matter how smart it is. It's how fast you can communicate the >> > 10^7 bits of human knowledge in your brain that nobody knows except >> > you. >> > >> > -- >> > -- Matt Mahoney, [email protected] >> >> >> -- >> Ben Goertzel, PhD >> http://goertzel.org >> >> "The dewdrop world / Is the dewdrop world / And yet, and yet …" -- >> Kobayashi Issa > > Artificial General Intelligence List / AGI / see discussions + participants + > delivery options Permalink -- Ben Goertzel, PhD http://goertzel.org "The dewdrop world / Is the dewdrop world / And yet, and yet …" -- Kobayashi Issa ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/Ta6fce6a7b640886a-M836d594ea119a0ef6f37db8e Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
