>From the Greek On, "being" as in ontology, OnML would have been called ObjectML if the name was available, and is meant to serve as a store for object identities and histories, and could be the base for PersonML. In fact human cognition is so anthropomorphic that objects could have been modeled in PersonML as well. It has to be said that the notion of an object in good old OOP is not really that far removed from the requirements of AGI, if you consider that there will be entities in the world whose behavior is/would most concisely be captured by "methods", ie something more dynamic than XML. The intention here is to capture and convert as much as possible of the dynamic information into readily available static descriptions, even if it results in hidden complexity in the form of natural language. Philosophical efforts such as "you cannot cross the same river twice" have not really had much impact on everyday life, but there does come a time when we are forced to declare "he is not the same person anymore" or "this is not the forest of my childhood". I don't think we have any theoretical results suggesting one way to represent such facts is better than the other, but it does seem reasonable to represent the most salient versions of objects as Object1, Object2, Object3 etc. Most people alive would not mind at all if assassination attempts against Hitler were successful during WWII, but I am guessing they would raise some objections when he was 25, 15 or 5, in other words there is always a Hitler1 and a Htiler2. The idea is that for understanding and reasoning you would like to process Hitler's biography once and explicitly represent different epochs for future reference, rather than scan the PersonML description (or any other data store) time and time again.
Speaking of AGI and in light of the circular discussions we are having most of the time, I would like to coin the term Artificial General Human Intelligence, AGHI. I don't think this should be half as controversial as Ben fathering AGI from AI. If you just consider the biases and suprastructure involved in something like friendly AI, it is further apart from AGI, compression, AIXI than AGI is from alpha-beta pruning and mini-max. As an example, I would assert that OpenCog's current architecture where notions such as "is" and "has" are evolved will have a hard time converging to a human narrative where some things, some of the time, "are" and "have" in very rigid, symbolic ways. It is the same objection one would raise to connectionism, only much worse. Finally, the Japanese events remind us that high intelligence, high density, low entropy, high interdependency are all accidents waiting to happen. Smart as we are, we have to progress *intelligently* ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/8660244-d750797a Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
