On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 9:56 PM, Steve Richfield <[email protected]>wrote:
> not only arriving at conclusions, but PROVING them right or wrong. > > Wouldn't it be wonderful to see a computer program that could do THAT? > > Well gentlemen, I would like to believe Sergio and his causal vision, but I can't bring myself to bridge the gap between information and world. Certainly everything a deterministic computer does is a PROOF, but matching the "program" to the "world" is practically and theoretically nearly intractable, especially if it has to be done from scratch, let's say by observing single photons (I have previously asked how wide a datapipe do you think your reality cruncher will need to get to grips with... well, reality). I'd like to see how well causal sets do with non-AGI problems, let's say chess and forex trading, and, dare I say, codebreaking. Of course there could be many objections to such non-smooth problems, such as my grandmother's general intelligence in the absence of chess and mathematical skills. Still, we need to draw some conclusions from domains where we know the "functional", at least to a significant degree. AT ------------------------------------------- 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
