Coherent, and fairly comprehensive. I like the direction this is going. How about we suss out what we know now, and go from there?
What seems to be working and who is leading in that path? I find its easiest for me when embarking on a project, to query my mind to find out what I truly do know, what I don't know, and what I can guess that I might know, or need to know. BTW: Do anyone like the website? On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:47 PM, Colin Hales <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Mike, > We're embarking on AGI. This contrasts well with narrow AI. Seems to me > the distinction is well understood and is a keeper. > > The rest? This is fluid. The only thing that is solid at the base of this > IGI proposition is the distinction between (a) natural computation (as > present in organic or inorganic form of human or natural origins) and (b) > abstract computation (models), which is what happens in computers and > neuromorphic chips. The latter (b) waves symbols about, telling a > human-defined story about what the natural substrate does. e.g. > Neuromorphic chips merely wave the symbols about with a voltage waveform. > Computers modulate abstract numbers. In contrast, the new category (a) lets > nature actually be the story as written by the natural substrate itself. > These two approaches can diverge in their intellect potential in ways it is > the IGIs job to explore. > > So this distinction needs to be named and understood and is, in the end > the whole reason why the IGI exists. How it gets named/discussed? I don't > know. We're doing our best to sort it out. And whatever we sort out is just > that. Some new way of talking. Not knowledge engraved on rocks. There's a > whole new infrastructure to establish and we're just trying to find how to > talk about it. This shift is not simple enough to use existing systems of > discussion. That is actually the reason why the shift exists! Because the > (a)/(b) distinction has never been isolated properly. > > So if we put stuff in a potential paper, perhaps critique of the "this > confuses me because..." form would be useful? None of us are perfect! Then > we could head off potential misunderstandings in others. > > We're trying to find a new way to talk about the most complex object in > the known universe. It's reasonable to think maybe what we do now isn't > adequate and that the new concepts may take a while to bed in. > > regards, > > Colin Hales > > > > > > > On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 10:07 AM, Mike Archbold <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Why don't you just call it "AI" and if somebody asks THEN you can >> clarify it? I mean, why be arcane about it? One of the reasons I got >> into AI is because I don't like the way that people create things that >> are intentionally difficult and known only to the in-group. Now here >> you go with a boatload of new acronyms, known only to the select tiny >> group that knows the secret meaning behind it. So, I guess I am >> getting into Alan Grimes vent space with this. >> >> On 5/20/15, Dorian Aur <[email protected]> wrote: >> > *Colin et al,* >> > >> > >> > A possible plan for H-AGI towards S-AGI paper >> > >> > >> > >> > *Hybrid artificial general intelligent systems towards S-AGI* >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > *Introduction* – a short presentation of AI systems and general goal to >> > build human general intelligence >> > >> > >> > >> > Why H-AGI? >> > >> > - Present different forms of computation , ( particular forms of >> > computation analog, digital -Turing machines ) >> > - Computations in the brain (examples of computations that are hardly >> > replicated on digital computers) >> > - H-AGI can include all forms of computations, algorithmic / >> > non-algorithmic, analog, digital,* quantum and classical *since >> > biological structure is incorporated in the system >> > >> > >> > >> > *Steps to develop H-AGI* >> > >> > >> > >> > - A. Build the structure using either natural stem cells or induced >> > pluripotent cells a three-dimensional vascularized structure, test >> 3D >> > printing possibilities >> > - Shape the structure and control spatial organization of cells >> > - Detect the need of neurotrophic factors, nutrients and oxygen >> ...use >> > nanosensor devices, carbon nanotubes... >> > - Regulate, control the entire phenomenon using a computer interface, >> > ability to use combine analog/digital and biophysical computations >> > >> > B. Train the hybrid system >> > >> > - Enhance bidirectional communication between biological structure >> and >> > computers >> > - Create and use a virtual world to provide accelerated training, >> use >> > machine learning, DL, digital/algorithmic AI or AGI if something is >> > developed on digital systems >> > - The interactive training system should also shape the evolution of >> > biological structure, natural language and visual information can be >> > progressively included >> > >> > see details in Can we build a conscious machine, >> > http://arxiv.org/abs/1411.5224 >> > >> > >> > *Goals of H-AGI* >> > >> > H-AGI can be seen as a transitional step required to understand which >> > parts can be fully replicated in a synthetic form to build a more >> powerful >> > system, >> > >> > · Natural language processing, robotics... >> > >> > · Space exploration, colonization..... etc >> > >> > · Techniques for therapy (brain diseases, cancer ....) since we >> will >> > learn how to shape biological structure >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Dorian >> > >> > >> > PS This brief presentation may also provide an idea about possible >> > collaboration list 1- list 3 >> > >> > >> > >> > On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 11:20 PM, Mike Archbold <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> > A summary ....we are looking at the idea that there are 2 fundamental >> >> kinds >> >> > of putative AGI (1) & (3), and their hybrid (2) that forms a third >> >> approach >> >> > as follows: >> >> > >> >> > (1) C-AGI computer substrate only. Neuromorphic equivalents of >> it. >> >> > (2) H-AGI hybrid of (1) and (3). The inorganic version is a new >> >> > kind >> >> > of neuromorphic chip. The organic version has ... erm... organics in >> >> > it. >> >> > (3) S-AGI synthetic AGI. organic or inorganic. Natural brain >> >> > physics >> >> > only. No computer. >> >> > >> >> > (aside: S-AGI just came out of my fingers. I hope this is OK, >> Dorian!) >> >> > >> >> >> >> This is a cool idea, somewhat mind boggling in its possibilities. >> >> Cool though! >> >> >> >> Personally I would favor something more like "EM-AGI" for >> >> electromagnetic AGI. I mean, I don't understand the details of the >> >> approach, only the generalities. But, "S" seems a bit vague/ambiguous >> >> while EM hits it more or less on target IMHO. >> >> >> >> MIke A >> >> >> >> >> >> > Think this way: What we have now is 100% computer. S-AGI is 100% >> >> > natural >> >> > physics (organic or inorganic). H-AGI is set somewhere in between. >> >> > It's >> >> > the level of computer computation/natural computation that is at >> issue. >> >> All >> >> > are computation. >> >> > >> >> > The human brain is a natural version of (3) with a neuronal/astrocyte >> >> > substrate. (3) has no computer whatever in it. it retains all the >> >> natural >> >> > physics (whatever that is). H-AGI targets the inclusion of the >> >> > essential >> >> > natural brain physics in the substrate of (2) and to incorporate (1) >> >> > computer-substrates and software to an extent to be determined. In my >> >> case >> >> > an H-AGI would be inorganic. Others see differently. >> >> > >> >> > Where you might have a stake in this? >> >> > >> >> > The history of AGI can be summed up as an experiment that seeks to >> see >> >> > if >> >> > the role of (1) C-AGI as a brain is fundamentally indistinguishable >> >> > from >> >> > (3) S-AGI under all conditions. That is the hypothesis. The 65 year >> old >> >> bet >> >> > that has attracted 100% of the investment to date. H-AGI does not >> make >> >> that >> >> > presupposition and seeks to contrast (1) and (3) in revealing ways >> that >> >> > then allow us to speak authoritatively about the (1)/(3) relationship >> >> > in >> >> > AGI potential. Only then will we really understand the difference >> >> > between >> >> > (1) and (3). So far that difference is entirely and intuition. A good >> >> one. >> >> > But only intuition. Its time for that intuition to be turned into >> >> science. >> >> > Experiments in (1) have ruled to date. Now we seek to do some (2)... >> >> > E.E. >> >> > we have 65 years of 'control' subject. H-AGI builds the first 'test' >> >> > subject. >> >> > >> >> > How about this? >> >> > >> >> > What would be super cool is if this mighty AGI beast you intend >> making >> >> > could be turned into the brain of a robot. Then we could contrast >> what >> >> > it >> >> > does with what an IGI candidate brain does in an identical robot in >> the >> >> > same test. That kind of testing vision (as far off as it may seem) >> is a >> >> > potential way your work and the IGI might interface. Which candidate >> >> robot >> >> > best encounters radical novelty, without any human >> >> intervention/involvement >> >> > whatever? .... is a really good question. To do this test you'd not >> >> > need >> >> to >> >> > reveal anything about its workings. Observed robot behaviour is >> >> > decisive. >> >> > >> >> > It seems to me that whatever venture you plan, it might be wise to >> keep >> >> an >> >> > eye on any (2)/(3) approaches. IGI or not. Because it is directly >> >> informing >> >> > expectations of outcomes in (1). We are currently asking the question >> >> "*If >> >> > H-AGI were to be championed into existence, what would the first >> >> > vehicle >> >> > for that look like?*" If the enthusiasm maintains it will be sketched >> >> into >> >> > a web page and we'll see what it tells us and what to do next. It may >> >> halt. >> >> > It may go. I don't know. Worth a shot? You bet. >> >> > >> >> > With your (1) C-AGI glasses firmly strapped to your head, your wisdom >> >> > at >> >> > all stages in this would be well received, whatever the messages. So >> if >> >> you >> >> > have time to keep an eye on happenings, I for one would appreciate >> it. >> >> > >> >> > regards >> >> > >> >> > Colin Hales >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 6:58 AM, Peter Voss <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> Thanks for asking. Haven’t followed the IGI discussions. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Is this about non-computer based approaches to AGI? If so, I don’t >> >> think >> >> >> I have anything positive to contribute. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> More generally, non-profit orgs need strong focus and champions. >> And >> >> >> specific goals. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *From:* Benjamin Kapp [mailto:[email protected]] >> >> >> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 19, 2015 12:23 PM >> >> >> *To:* AGI >> >> >> *Subject:* Re: [agi] Institute of General Intelligence (IGI) >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Mr. Voss, >> >> >> >> >> >> Given your understanding of the AGI community do you believe an IGI >> >> would >> >> >> be redundant? Would your organization be open to collaborating with >> >> >> the >> >> >> IGI? Do you have any advice for how we could be successful in >> >> >> starting >> >> >> up >> >> >> this organization? Perhaps you would be open to being a member of >> the >> >> >> board? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 2:03 PM, Peter Voss <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> Not something that can be adequately covered in a few words, but…. >> >> “We’re >> >> >> building a fully integrated, top-down & bottom-up, real-time, >> adaptive >> >> >> knowledge (& skill) representation, learning and reasoning engine. >> >> >> We’re >> >> >> using a combination of graph representation and NN techniques >> overlaid >> >> >> with >> >> >> fuzzy, adaptive rule systems” – ha! >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Here again are links for some clues: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> http://www.kurzweilai.net/essentials-of-general-intelligence-the-direct-path-to-agi >> >> >> >> >> >> http://www.realagi.com/index.html >> >> >> >> >> >> https://www.facebook.com/groups/RealAGI/ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *From:* Benjamin Kapp [mailto:[email protected]] >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Mr. Voss, >> >> >> >> >> >> Since you are the founder I'm certain you know what agi-3's >> >> >> methodology >> >> >> is. In a few words (maybe more?) could you share with us what that >> >> >> is? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Peter Voss <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> *>*http://www.agi-3.com They just glue together anything and >> >> everything >> >> >> that works. >> >> >> >> >> >> Actually, no. We have a very specific theory of AGI and >> architecture >> >> >> >> >> >> *Peter Voss* >> >> >> >> >> >> *Founder, AGI Innovations Inc.* >> >> >> >> >> >> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >> >> >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/26973278-698fd9ee>| >> >> >> Modify >> >> >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription >> >> >> >> >> >> <http://www.listbox.com> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >> >> >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/231420-b637a2b0>| >> >> Modify >> >> >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription >> >> >> >> >> >> <http://www.listbox.com> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now >> > >> >> >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/11721311-20a65d4a> >> | >> >> >> Modify >> >> >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> >> >> >> Your Subscription <http://www.listbox.com> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > ------------------------------------------- >> >> > AGI >> >> > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now >> >> > RSS Feed: >> >> https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/11943661-d9279dae >> >> > 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/303/17795807-366cfa2a >> >> 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/303/11943661-d9279dae >> > 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/303/11721311-20a65d4a >> 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> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/27079473-66e47b26> | > Modify > <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> > Your Subscription <http://www.listbox.com> > -- Regards, Mark Seveland ------------------------------------------- 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
