> -----Original Message----- > From: Matt Mahoney via AGI [mailto:[email protected]] > > A p-conscious AGI and a zombie AGI would have identical behavior because > that is how a zombie is defined. (See > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_zombie ). Therefore both AGIs > would have identical designs and identical costs. Unless you believe (like > Penrose) that human behavior is not computable. I don't think anyone on > this list believes that a sufficiently powerful computer couldn't at least in > principle do what our 86 billion neurons do. >
Realistically they would not have identical behavior (as in "philosophical" zombie). IMO much of human behavior originates from the qualia aspect. The behavior in a p-zombie would need to be engineered and constructed differently from a real person. I'm estimating that it might be much more engineering resources and runtime resources to omit p-consciousness. Note: I'm not talking about replicating human p-consciousness really, just a subset, for example somewhere between a human and a marsupial but it could be much greater even super-human allowing huge open-endedness in design. Also I'm saying a p-zombie implementation would lack much of what makes us human in fact it wouldn't really be human. It would be incredibly useful, but getting closer to real human behavior might require an increasing amount of resources particularly memory. Why not evaluate constructing qualia/sentience? Though that's easier to imagine if one assumes that it exists. > BTW, do you agree with my cost estimate? > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Z0kr3XDoM6cr5TgHH0GXQTjyikr7W > pCkpWFn9IglW3o > It's in interesting approach. There are many issues, here's a few: 1) The $70 trillion figure is not cited. 2) DNA upper bound should be more compressible. 3) Equating lines of genome code to software code and pricing it is ridiculous. 4) The Landauer estimate needs to be updated, somehow. 5) Knowledge of every employee needn't be recreated there is huge redundancy. 6).... This financial estimate is highly skewed to the upside I can't even estimate how much it's off... > I realize it is tempting to look for some magic shortcut like consciousness or > quantum computing or P = NP to get around this $1 quadrillion problem that > we have been working on for the last 60 years. > Don't make the mistake that just because something is dark and mysterious, like p-consciousness is, that you can't feasibly build it. And don't assume that building a functional replica is more difficult to build than the original, as in p-consciousness. A realistic p-zombie-like estimation of behavior would not be a functional replica, it would be a simulation. John ------------------------------------------- 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
