> No one here has agreed with any part of this - and I have discussed every > part to some extent.
Pretty much every AGI researcher would agree with you that human-level AGI requires " AGI is the prosecution of *idea-based, *one-step-at-a-time, improvised, * adventurous, *patchwork new courses of action. Creative new, "ill-structured"/ *free thought and action. In the real world. " However, they might not agree with your idiosyncratic interpretations of some of these words ;-p ... The only possible exception, from memory, is that you > do refer somewhere in your writings to improvisation. > > But there is nothing AFAIK in Opencog that improvises. I wrote software to improvise music in 1994, using genetic programming & fractals. Big deal. I think it would have passed the experimental-industrial-music guitar Turing test, though... ;) .... Others have done similar. OpenCog is certainly intended to be able to improvise, but you lack the education to be able to understand how... > I don't think you can improvise BTW without fluid schemas/ outlines/ > concepts directing embodied action. That is another new part of the > approach. And you have completely disagreed with this - which is absolutely > fundamental to AGI. Almost nobody disagrees with the need for "fluid schemas / outlines / concepts directing embodied action." You just reflexively disagree with, and don't comprehend, our intended methods of achieving such ;) .. ben ------------------------------------------- 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
