Ben, On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Ben Goertzel <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > My point was that it is damn near impossible to even make a case for >> designing in emergent properties. >> >> *How would YOU do such a thing*, other than just trying zillions of >> semi-random experiments? >> > > Via theoretical understanding of the type of system one is building... > But, for emergent properties, this is equivalent to having done the math to do this, which we have previously agreed is a BIG job probably requiring years of work at a research institute. > >> Have you thought about a GA "supervisor" for OpenCog, to replace current >> developers?!!! If the prospect of an OpenCog-descendant AGI is workable >> (you already know my opinion), this might provide your only realistic shot >> at it. As in the previous paragraph, you will first need the measure for >> intelligence as part of this. >> > > Currently, automated program learning works OK for LISP programs > containing up to a few dozen nodes in their corresponding program trees. > That's way too small to use GP or any other automated program learning > methods to evolve AGIs. > Agreed. We are still a LONG way from being able to do this. > > One would need an AGI evolutionary program learning system, to evolve > programs big enough to be AGIs ;) > My (and I think your) hope is to be able to develop tiny systems with a hint of what you want on large systems. The trick would be in even recognizing <1% of an AGI. Steve ------------------------------------------- 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
