Venturing into the Void.... "Umm...why not use MySql or Sql Server or Mongo DB for your object store?" (Some of these are free.) ~PM -----------------------
> Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2013 17:18:33 -0400 > Subject: [agi] Re: My Relatively Simple AGI Project > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > > I am trying to refurbish a database management program that I wrote a > few years ago and I keep finding additional lists (indexes) that I > have to implement (the class of each of the lists is almost complete) > and I just cannot keep it simple. I haven't even started testing any > of my AGI theories and the program is already becoming too > complicated. I intend on using a lot of data related to a concept (a > concept like collection of related data) because one basis of my > theories is that it takes a lot of knowledge about a subject to 'know' > one simple fact about the subject. So this means that all my lists > will add to the complications of the program once I start testing it. > > The non-programming resolute skeptics do not realize how complicated a > "simple" program can be. My database management program is simple > because I am using variations on the same basic algorithms. In fact, > the first step of my refurbishing the program was to take the class > for the lists and the indexes out of a template that I had written for > them and use write individual algorithms for the common algorithms > that I had defined in a template 6 or 7 years ago. I found that I did > not have enough details to debug the system using the templates even > though they were working well and I was not able to figure out how to > keep track of run time errors when there was a problem. (That is not > an impossible task, but it was just one more thing multiplied over and > over again.) > > Programming is complicated. It may turn out that don't have good AGI > because the management system for a program that is supposed to be > creative is in itself going to be extremely complicated. So people > get stuck into traditional programming methods just because they were > partly designed to make programming a little more simple. - Jim Bromer > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 10:49 PM, Jim Bromer <[email protected]> wrote: > > My idea that an AGI program has to have an executive function or > > process that it is very simple but it has to be capable of AGI seems > > obvious enough. It has to be lightweight or simple because the more > > complicated it gets the greater the potential it will have to create > > logjams. It might turn out that a lot of the potential for logjams > > may be due to programming errors, but just as every little detail can > > add some greater complexity to the programming, so can each detail add > > to the complexity of the AGI program as it runs. > > > > Secondly, the recognition that the integration of Conceptual Structure > > is the key to making it work is also a potential key to making the AGI > > part relatively simple. Conceptual Structure is not a blanket > > abstraction that the programmer completely details with his program > > but a more creative structure that the program must create. So, yes, > > Conceptual Structure is an abstract system - or more accurately > > Conceptual Structure will consist of multiple implementations of > > abstract systems - but it will be systems that are generated by the > > AGI program as it is running. This idea of the Conceptual Structure, > > which is based on the fact that concepts play roles when integrated > > with other concepts, has to be kept simple or else it will be too > > complicated and too slow for the program to manage it. > > > > Finally the program has to use rational creativity and it has to use > > some kind of trial and error method. But the interesting thing about > > this theory is that now I that I have an initial conjecture about > > Conceptual Structure I should be able to craft it with as much control > > as I need. Presuming that at first I will need to find a way to input > > many of the details of how concepts should be integrated means that my > > first endeavors would not really be AI or AGI even if my current > > theory works. But at some point I hope to be able to figure out a way > > for the program to learn how to determine more of the steps to > > intelligently integrate conceptual structures. > > > > One theory that was never established, even weakly, in experiment was > > that once you figured out how to create an AI program that it should > > eventually become more adept at learning new things. I believe that > > the theory of Conceptual Structures would make that feasible - if the > > theory is any good at all. And this is how you could test the program > > to compare it against competing AGI programs. It could learn new > > things and integrate it as long as you could teach it. > > > > Jim Bromer > > > ------------------------------------------- > AGI > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/19999924-4a978ccc > Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; > Powered by Listbox: 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-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
