A couple comments below:
On 1/10/2013 11:54 AM, David Clark wrote:
This response is for Aaron and John.
Both, however, are mathematical. You are shadow boxing.
Again, conclusions with no supporting arguments.
Although I don't put much value in "beliefs" or "intuition", I am
guilty of a few as well.
1.I believe that AGI can be created using software we have today, on
computers that exist today. AGI has not been created yet so I have no
proof that this is true, even though I am acting as if it is.
Probably true. Some problems can be solved with much older computers
just because we have many more training examples now than ever before --
that can be digested by a lot of processing and the digested info can be
passed along to lesser power computers. And, the computing power that
Watson requires can be had for just $200 per hour from Amazon's service,
so anyone can rent a supercomputer.
2.I believe that AGI can't move forward until programs have the
unlimited ability to create other programs. This hasn't happened yet
and therefore I have no proof that this capability will be more
successful than current approaches BUT at least it isn't one of the
techniques that we know doesn't work.
My guess is that this isn't necessary. As long as they can change their
internal maps and structures in the data -- that should be close enough
to creating from-scratch programs to solve AI/AGI problems. But, one
computer's data is another computer's program.
-- Dimitry Volfson
____________________________________________________________
Woman is 53 But Looks 25
Mom reveals 1 simple wrinkle trick that has angered doctors...
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/50ef2935323102934059dst03vuc
-------------------------------------------
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
