Perhaps the real question that Andi was asking was whether Andi should give up. Now there is a simple question that Andi can ask himself to verify this theory that he was projecting. Have you been thinking about giving up?Jim Bromer From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Subject: [agi] Tilting at Windmills Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 09:58:03 -0700
I would agree that Google is a Behemoth with resources. So is IBM. I personally think HAL = SIRI + Watson. So, what is the rationale for me to research AGI? My answer is to learn more about myself and others.My seminal question that started me on this Piaget Modeler adventure was "What is a Mental Model and how do we form them." Pure and simple. I've learned a lot in a very short time and for me that is the reward. It's personal. Even if they build an AGI, that's nice. But I'm sure there are many ways to skin a cat. And perhaps there is not only one way to build an AGI. There are after all, many ways to fly, (e.g., like birds, like aircraft) and we have not yet ventured very far into some of them (e.g. sonic levitation, magnetic levitation). The Wright Brothers didn't give up. Why should any one of us? Why Should Jim Bromer or Arthur Murray, or Ben Goertzel? We shouldn't. Cheers, ~PM Subject: Re: [agi] Re: Summary of My Current Theory For an AGI Program. From: [email protected] Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 09:37:09 -0500 To: [email protected] Jim, at this point I was not trying to address your theories specifically. I was just expressing exasperation at the lack of technical detail here right now. Details are import and need to be specific and precise in order for work to be done. Yeah, sorry about getting ticky about use of terms, but when you study this stuff academically, what can perhaps seem like simple mistakes of terminology come across as, I guess I would say "unprofessional". I suppose this group has always been like this, but I'm right now trying to say, well, it is possible to be negative, but give clear reasons for and not just shout and be emotional. Sorry for not being more constructive. I think I might have had some more sort of detailed things I could address, but they were piling up to the level of no longer seeming to be of much value. So to throw something somewhat more positive out there, I just looked at the website of the people working at Google Research. They've got literally tons of people in areas like machine perception, AI, machine learning, machine translation. It does give me the feeling that there are people, and with enough plugging, they will eventually get AGI as just a natural progression. Of, course, I think they field and the stuff they use has some missing bits, but that's just me. You all can tilt at all the windmills y'all want, but they have money and talent at a level we can't approach.andi 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-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
