Hi, Later (few years), once the background science issues are sorted out, I'll do the detailed planning/costing for likely route to the first AGI is as follows:
0) It is big science directed at one big result. It is a 'moon-shot' or 'CERN Collider' or a 'WEBB Telescope' or a 'Human Brain-Project' ... that kind of size. 1) Duration: 10-15 years Following a 3 year (?) setup process and preliminary science. 2) Goal: Dog-sized robot with the brain the size of a bee (~500K neurons equivalent). 3) Testing: Two identical robots. Subject (a) with a traditional computer-physics chip brain (neuromorphic or Von Neumann). Subject (b) with a brain-physics chip (not a computer, no software). The differences and similarities will be compared/contrasted in the same autonomous learning context. More details of test regime available on request. 4) Project requirements: (i) A chip foundry with 2 parallel prototype production lines dedicated to making the brain of subject (b). (ii) A robot fabrication facility to develop and refine, on an ongoing basis, the embodiment of both subjects. (ii) A large and novel AGI test/certification facility and its international oversight. Double-blind testing done without direct human involvement in the test. The test subjects themselves deliver the result inside the test facility. All humans can do is watch. 5) Process: Software for (a) developed in standard ways (possibly run by a cloud?). Human assisted evolution of the brain of subject (b) over the years. 6) Estimated Cost: US$2-$3Billion over the whole period. I'd allow $5Billion if I was running it and not tell anyone. The new chips are 3D and large. They can be made in slices by current foundry tech. Stacked slices clamped to become the final chip. The project could start after a US $50million preparation phase. The result AGI at BEE-level certified. There are a lot of other implications but I'll leave it there. This is doable, right now. We are actually over-prepared because we've been getting the science itself wrong for decades and the tech has actually outstripped the needs of the project to some extent. It's also what I call 'intrinsically safe' AGI. Because it comes implicitly 'boxed' by hardware limits, like natural general intelligence. By 'safe' I mean 'as safe as it gets'. Nobody's ever properly considered the real practical safety landscape of an AGI/Robot that does not use a computer or software for a brain. It's a very different proposition. I won't say any more about this. if you are compiling a list of ways ahead: this is my offering. A few hundred million a year for a decade? Cheaper than UBER, and you actually get a truckload of real IP at the end. Colin > > We don't have the social & political structures to even start an > ambitious single software project with 10000 computer scientists working > for several decades. And we might not even know what organizational > structure could make such a project possible. > > > So I don't expect AGI to come soon. > > > -- > Basile STARYNKEVITCH == http://starynkevitch.net/Basile > opinions are mine only - les opinions sont seulement miennes > Bourg La Reine, France > > ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T87761d322a3126b1-M7c580f6cbfe44525d9078961 Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
