Hi Steve,
> > At some risk of being perceived off-topic, in *SUCCESSFUL* *DEVELOPMENT* > projects, coding usually accounts for ~15% of the overall effort. Sure you > an claim that your particular type of research contains MUCH more than > that, but you are nowhere near a product. It is my STRONG suspicion that by > the time AGI has been commercialized (if it ever is), that the portion that > is coding will have "shrunk" to 15% in the face of other wallet-emptiers, > like design, tables, etc. > True, coding is not a majority of the effort needed. But we already have a team of experienced OpenCog AI/design wizards, a few participating in the project full time now, and many participating only part-time and ready to jump in once more funding is available... Also, an advantage of an OSS approach is that one can leverage a variety of academics who will be willing to contribute their theoretical expertise if their students are using a certain OSS codebase for their thesis work. I'm pretty well connected in the academic AI world due to organizing the AGI conferences since 2006 ... > >> >>> which is TOO BIG to fund without an established cash flow, unless you >>> can demonstrate magic like Facebook has done. Anything over $10M MUST be >>> done as a public offering that requires SEC scrutiny that is there to BLOCK >>> companies with big dreams but nothing to show. >>> >> >> That's untrue, actually... >> > > I'll watch. > Silicon Valley companies routinely raise more than $10M in private venture funding (e.g. Vicarious Systems' last round, to name an AI example), so I'm not sure what you're talking about... > But Linux has prevailed without selling out to big companies (and without >> Torvalds getting insanely rich, for that matter). And so may an OSS AGI >> initiative, if things go well... >> > > Linux is <<<1% of AGI and so makes a horrible model. There was nothing to > do in Linux but code, because there was UNIX to copy, and UNIX is SO much > simpler than YOU are. > An OS is very different than an AGI, but still the Linux development model has things to teach us. The research aspect of AGI is different, but to help grapple with that we can reach out to academics who can help with an OSS project consistent with their university jobs, but couldn't join a commercial endeavor more than very-part-time without quitting... > > I suggest writing a business plan and putting it out there for people to > pick at, and then including an addendum addressing people objections that > you don't directly address in the plan. > > Well, we have put together a 3 year development plan for OpenCog (not as a business, as an OSS AGI project) and will be doing a corresponding fundraising push probably in Q2 next year, after we get our demos, documentation and tutorials cleaned up also..... But putting it out there for people to pick at doesn't seem productive at this stage.... It has already been critiqued by a number of experienced people, and tweaked a bit as a result... > Until then, it is all smoke and mirrors. If you wish to perceive it as smoke and mirrors, that's just fine with me, my friend ;) ... -- Ben ------------------------------------------- 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
