But I was talking about Artificial General Intelligence (AGI). Jim Bromer On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Mike Tintner <[email protected]>wrote:
> 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 <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Saturday, October 20, 2012 1:56 PM > *To:* AGI <[email protected]> > *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 <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> | > Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription > <http://www.listbox.com> > *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/10561250-164650b2> | > Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>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
