Stanley Nilsen via AGI <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm thinking that > intelligence is in the "eye of the assessor." > It is possible for an assessor to look at the thermostat and say - > - it is simple > - it is not very informed > - doesn't do any complicated prediction or modelling > etc. > This means that a thermostat is of low intelligence. > about goals... > the ability to achieve goals I would consider a "simple" form of > intelligence. Seems harder to compare goals and select the one that is the > better opportunity. To find and recognize opportunity takes a sophisticated > mechanism. This mechanism in my view is closer to the capability we call > intelligence.
The sensory data that would be presented to an AGI program is not structured for a computer program to completely recognize objects or how they interrelate so some training must take place in order to draw conclusions or create conjectures about what is occurring in the IO data environment. So initial recognition of the simplest 'objects' or 'patterns' is itself a true AGI problem. You required a lot of supplemental education to be able to think about your assessment of a thermostat. It is true that some observation was also necessary but again that observation was tied to more foundational theories that you learned about thermostats. (Some young programmers might not be able to grasp this discussion because they have never seen a mercury switch connected to a thermo-couple spring.) Jim Bromer On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 11:39 PM, Stanley Nilsen via AGI <[email protected]> wrote: > Given that no "unit" can determine how long it will survive, it makes sense > to have a "point in time" measure for intelligence. I'm thinking that > intelligence is in the "eye of the assessor." > > It is possible for an assessor to look at the thermostat and say - > - it is simple > - it is not very informed > - doesn't do any complicated prediction or modelling > etc. > This means that a thermostat is of low intelligence. > > A sophisticated assessor could be familiar with algorithms used in > prediction, and rules used for assertions, and the overall set of rules and > values being "held" by the unit. By study and accounting of the features of > the "unit," the assessor could give an educated guess on the level of > intelligence. Thus assigning the "high" intelligence attribute to the unit > if it has the right mechanisms. > > I am familiar with the concept of maximizing benefit as a proof of higher > intelligence, but I suspect that in practice one will look at the pieces and > make a call about the intelligence of the unit. > And, the good assessor might notice the vulnerability to stupidity. > > about goals... > the ability to achieve goals I would consider a "simple" form of > intelligence. Seems harder to compare goals and select the one that is the > better opportunity. To find and recognize opportunity takes a sophisticated > mechanism. This mechanism in my view is closer to the capability we call > intelligence. >... > stan > ------------------------------------------- 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
