Too much slack kills innovation. Attempts to game this <https://jimbowery.blogspot.com/2017/07/fusion-energy-prize-awards.html> have resulted in absolute disasters such as Tokamak and NASA setting back space settlement by 50 years <https://youtu.be/boLdXiLJZoY>.
The same thing happened in AI when some sort of congenital brain damage occurred at the dawn of the computer age, derailing model selection into Shannon rather than Algorithmic Information -- compounded by Minsky and Papert derailing even connectionism which, although in its feedforward mode is mere statistics, at least had an obvious path to Algorithmic information through recurrent nets. I know the guy who provided the funding to revive connectionism (ask Hinton, et al about Charlie Smith, a protege of Tukey who also knew Shannon) and there is no question about it: He wanted RECURRENT nets, which is why he supported Werbos. But even that got lost in the #*^$*@^ government-funding noise of the second NN summer. Like most other failures of civilization now becoming apparent, the slack-poison is a result of network effect monopoly profits in places like Google with sewage like GPT-N bragging about the size of their models. On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 9:59 PM Shashank Yadav <[email protected]> wrote: > ->crossing the "who's getting money" table with who's actually close to > AGI could be a useful barometer for ...getting to the singularity. > > Given how governments spend their money [I'm not US national but this > twitter thread > <https://twitter.com/RichardHanania/status/1341154737459064836> is a good > example of how financial stimulus generally flows] its only expected that > they'd try to get ahead of the latest trend. If we get to AGI, I suppose > there will be fundamentally qualitative differences in AI technology as a > result of the new development. So other approaches [example > <https://arxiv.org/abs/1905.10985>] which haven't been getting a *lot* of > funding cannot be ruled out. But it won't be surprising if its still the > DeepMinds and OpenAIs of the world, there is clearly a “compute divide” > between those and the rest. > > - > regards, > The task is not impossible. > <https://muskdeer.blogspot.com/> > > ---- On Wed, 23 Dec 2020 05:20:28 +0530 *Alan Grimes via AGI > <[email protected] <[email protected]>>* wrote ---- > > There is an AI.gov site out there. I skimmed much of it and the sense I > get from it is that it was templated off of an earlier document written > in 1980 about the personal computer revolution. > > They're trying to get ahead of what they see as an important trend but > the bottom line is they don't get it. > > Furthermore, we don't have a firm grasp on how far the design space of > AGI is from the design space of systems that are called AI or deep > learning today. So crossing the "who's getting money" table with who's > actually close to AGI could be a useful barometer for how close we are > getting to the singularity. > > -- > The vaccine is a LIE. > #EggCrisis > The Great Reset > Powers are not rights. > > *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/agi/subscription> Permalink > <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T3e69a5c2413c8560-M5e1500cbe9a7fa389e6517a2> ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T3e69a5c2413c8560-M59ae55ab07b0b58efe18cf98 Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
