Steve,
I am not very good at getting my foot in the door. But there is a critical difference. The 4004 worked some, perhaps not the best, but some, just enough to sell it and make money. In AGI, there is only one solution, Plan B, specifically to install the inference on the computer rather than using the one in our brains. Only one. The difference with the 4004, is that AI, and even that what they now call AGI, are not working, and they desperately need something that works. Chess playing machines, jeopardy playing machines, self-driving cars, are same as your 4004, but in this case they don't work. That's my idea, exploit the weakness of the big guys. Sooner or later, they will have to ask. At that time, we need to have something to show. Then we will have a foot in the door. . Bill Gates had very little . just that miserable OS he had just bought and probably didn't even understand very well . still. So for now, let's work on "something to show." Sergio From: Steve Richfield [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2012 8:57 PM To: AGI Subject: Re: [agi] Analog Computation Sergio, This entire debate reminds me of the late pre-micro era. I had my own plan to build the first microcomputer. It was to be a bipolar chip that implemented a bit-serial architecture. It would have been about the same speed as the early MOS micros, but would have modern-day word lengths and hardware multiply/divide. In short, it was a better way that was never built. Since then, I have met two other people who had their own plans to build the first microcomputer, each of which was quite different from the others, and all of which were MUCH better than any of the early micros. So, why did they waste good silicon building garbage like the 4004 and 8008? Because we were on the OUTSIDE. Our proposals were being rejected by the same sorts of folks who were working on the 4004, and so they had to be killed lest they compete. We failed because we couldn't get past the front door. However, the 4004 succeeded because they had easily avoided the greatest barrier of all - the front door. Here we fail because we are outsiders to all of the corporations who desperately need what we know how to do. Of course we can always throw proposals over their transoms, only to find their way to the very people who would be threatened by them. In short, this is a people problem, and not a technological problem. Any ideas for a good solution? Steve AGI | <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/18883996-f0d58d57> | <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; ad2> Modify Your Subscription <http://www.listbox.com> ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-c97d2393 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-2484a968 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
