On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 6:54 PM, Jim Bromer <[email protected]> wrote:
> I believe I can write a simple AGI program in a year. > Ha, ya sure you can, k go ahead. I'm sure you'll be more humble after you do ;-), write an AGI program for a year that is. > It would not convince the worse skeptics but I would hope to show > programmers and enthusiasts that it can: > > 1. Learn the basics of a human language or a primitive version of one. > > 2. Learn simple things from discussion. > > 3. Learn to make (simple non-mathematical) correlations (between 'objects' > of discussion) and generalize based on what it learned through language. > 4. Learn the limitations on generalization and on the use of correlations > as objectives. > 5. Use reason-based-reasoning. > > However, it will not be perfect, and it will become overwhelmed by the > complexity of acquired knowledge. > > > > Now let's say that 5 months go by and I haven't started the program. > Yo Jim don't delay, start today! :-) > Well, if I am still reasonably healthy and have the same amount of free > time that I have now that would indicate that my ideas probably weren't > that great. Does that prove that my ideas are wrong? No, but it would > indicate that I do not have every concept that I need to actually start > working on the program. > Pst, Agile, rapid-prototyping, simply make a small prototype, then work your way up. > In other words, it would stand as evidence that there is something > important that I haven't figured out. > nah, there is no excuse for not producing some kind of code. > > > Now let's say that I did get the basic program together but it doesn't do > anything intelligent. That would be a strong indication that my ideas > did not work, that I was missing something. > it's just a prototype. > > > Let's say that I felt that it was working but no one in this group (for > example) agreed with me. Then I would have to improve on it in order to > convince a few people. I don't feel that I would have to convince > everyone but I would have to be able to convince a few people that my > program was actually working - at least to the extent that I am describing > in this message. > Hey, most important is to convince at least yourself, and then use it as something useful, if you get benefit, and share that benefit, then other people will be keen to know also. > > > Now let's say that a few people thought it was working as far as it went, > but most people simply did not accept that it was a working AGI program. That > would be a difficult situation but the way I could validate my sense that > it was working (to the limited extent that I described above) would be to > modify it to show that it could learn using with other modalities (using > other forms of IO) and show that I was able to make actual improvements on > the different versions. At some point a few of the skeptics would start > to recognize that it was essentially learning new things in the way I have > described. > > > > Jim Bromer > Really, are you building an AGI or seeking approval? Those are generally different things. If you have an idea, you think worthwhile, start doing it. function name; description //pseudo-code //input, //output, //algorithm, // - // - // - //--------------- code go ahead, start now! :-) ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
