Just, On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 8:48 AM, justcamel <[email protected]> wrote:
> Ben, aren't some of your estimations regarding OpenCog also based on the > assumed computational power of our brain? Are you implying that OpenCog > could potentially deliver a human-level AGI on a 2-3 order of magnitude > less powerful hardware than our brains? That kind of sounds like nature is > 2-3 orders of magnitude less efficient hardware wise (yeah, not power wise)? > Differences in "power" comes at several different levels. For a computer to have an advantage it MUST be superior on an important level. So, let's look at the levels: 1. Speed. Reaction time maps directly to survival, so a computer must not be slower. Brains are massively parallel in a way that computers cannot (yet) approach, but the cycle time is much faster on computers. Computers could only win this race if critical paths could be identified and attended to. I don't know of anyone who has looked at this. 2. Suitability of computation. This is my own favorite challenge, because neurons routinely perform bidirectional computations, whereas (present day) computers are ONLY capable of unidirectional computation. Simulating bidirectionality would come at an EXTREME cost in speed. 3. Availability of not-yet-known algorithms, without which computers are WAY too slow to be of any use. For example, computer can't even parse TEXT at human speed without something like my patent 8,788,263, so how can any sane person expect to make an AGI on present-day computers. All in all, I think that Ben has it backwards - that our brains have the present advantage. I have posted numerous times for others to work with me on beating on some of these barriers, but so far, without effect. > > I would love to hear from anybody with thoughts on this! :-) Please see above. *Steve* ================= > > > > On 15.03.2017 07:19, Ben Goertzel wrote: > >> Obviously, these interesting new neuroscience results should be exciting >> and disturbing to anyone attempting to build AGI based on the >> "conventional" perspectives of neuroscience ... but for those of us >> building AGI based on non-neuroscience-oriented considerations, they're not >> terribly relevant... >> > > > > ------------------------------------------- > AGI > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/10443978-6f4c28ac > Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member > /?& > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > -- Full employment can be had with the stoke of a pen. Simply institute a six hour workday. That will easily create enough new jobs to bring back full employment. ------------------------------------------- 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
