Hey, I’m also able to create an autoresponder
How awesome am I? Wooooooowwwwwwww I got rid of jobs, give me millions of USD On 3. Dec 2019, at 19:52, digikar via AGI <[email protected]> wrote: > Okay, there have been a lot of responses - thank you to all! > > I don't mean to be critical but AGI is a really hard problem which no > individual on this list has the resources to solve. Google, Amazon, Apple, > Facebook, and Microsoft have made some progress, but these are companies with > trillion dollar market caps. A human brain sized neural network needs 10 to > 20 petaflops and a petabyte of RAM. Our software, encoded in DNA, is > equivalent to 300 million lines, or $30 billion. And then you have to train > it on an exabyte of video. > > But this approach doesn't even make sense. Our whole economy is based on job > specialization. It is far more efficient to organize machines like we > organize people, each doing a specific task. Everyone making progress in AI > is doing narrow AI, and really this is the only practical approach. Instead > of trying to automate a million different jobs all at once, you'll have more > success automating one job. That's going to be hard enough, given that all > the low hanging fruit has been picked. > > Indeed, hardware might be a limitation for another decade or two. I think the > advantage big companies have is especially of horizontal scaling; at the end > of the day, somebody has to "scale vertically", study all the relevant > aspects and put together the framework. If no one does, the resulting system > would be a mess, no one would "understand" it - and therefore, trusting it > would be risky. I mean, someone articulated that what'd be fearsome is not an > AI system coming alive, but the AI system optimizing a very specific goal - > say, optimizing paper-clip production. > > Despite all things, a quest to understand human intelligence stays alive. I'd > hope I don't rest my livelihood on this. But this is, indeed, something I'd > enjoy working if I did not have any concerns about finance. Ultimately, we > want a system, to which we can "upload ourselves", for, say, space travel(?). > > Thank you Peter for all those links; I'll have a go through them some time. > and an overall index > https://medium.com/@petervoss/my-ai-articles-f154c5adfd37 > > You might take a look at Pei Wang's NARS system; > an 'Open NARS' system is available. > There are actually a ton of ideas and implementations: Artificial General > Intelligence (Cognitive Technologies) is a good reference I think. However, I > can only try one or two of them at one time, without freezing by analysis; so > long as a community exists around some work (I don't want to work in a void), > I'd be willing to try it out. > > @keghnfeem, please do implement the theories; hardly anyone would have time > to look at theories alone - a (working) implementation seems more efficient > in a community sense - like, since none of us is a God (or some perfect > being), we are all fallible - if the implementation of the theory doesn't > work, the time of all reviewers would be wasted, especially when all of the > reviewers have their own ideas about how things could be and would want to > test their own theories out before testing others'. > > Artificial General Intelligence List / AGI / see discussions + participants + > delivery options > Permalink ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T90616547efdb2db4-M5ccae8e1e8631096f524dcaf Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
