Jim: The theory that AGI can only work if it is a part of a robot has no basis
in actual experimentation and it is not based on a well reasoned insight into
the essential nature of how a computer works.
This is total cobblers – and extraordinarily ignorant.
There is MASSIVE scientific evidence and experimentation that human and animal
thought is embodied-and-embedded every step/concept of the way. And you can
provide zero evidence that it is not.
Iacoboni, M., Mirroring People: The Science of Empathy and How We Connect with
Others, Picador (2009)
provides an excellent overview of the very large field of cognitive embodied
science, that is relevant here. It, or similar, is mandatory reading for AGI.
P.S. I don’t have time now but it is also no problem to demonstrate
philosophically/scientifically how language/conceptualisation is fundamentally
embodied-and-embedded throughout (and not just at the end with some final
“grounding”).
From: Jim Bromer
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 1:56 PM
To: AGI
Subject: Re: [agi] ONE EXAMPLE
MT said,
"Creativity does indeed involve a) the incorporation of, and b) adaptation, to
**new elements**. And it is in no way a mechanical problem for a robot – it is
merely impossible for a standalone computer."
---------------------------
When a person talks about AGI he is not talking about a "standalone computer"
algorithm, he is talking about a computer program that is responding to Input
and is able to produce some kind of Output. The computer that controls a robot
is not a different kind of thing than a desktop computer in the essential
nature that they only respond to ***DATA***. I do believe that IO Data
Environment has to have a certain range of kinds of data 'objects' which
exhibit certain kinds of relations to allow true AGI to emerge, but that is not
limited to the robotic IO world.
The notion that there is something so different about a robot that it would
literally enable general intelligence which would otherwise be *completely
impossible* for a computer (that is not controlling a robot) is just not borne
of an insightful understanding of what a computer is or how it works.
Yes, an AGI program has to have some sort of Input-Output and it has to react
to the things that happen in the IO Data environment. It also has to react
creatively. But the idea that an AGI program would *only* work if it is
attached to a robot is not based on sound reasoning and it is not based on
actual experimentation. Robotic AI/AGI has not advanced any further and it is
not advancing any faster than other forms of AI/AGI research.
The theory that AGI can only work if it is a part of a robot has no basis in
actual experimentation and it is not based on a well reasoned insight into the
essential nature of how a computer works.
Jim Bromer
AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription
-------------------------------------------
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
