At 12:13 17.11.02 -0500, Ben wrote: > >* time to development >* cost of development [more time and more expertise are needed] > >Thus, commercial deployment of AGI or even AGI-ish technologies is naturally >going to be limited to areas where the quality of behavior provided by >narrow AI systems just isn't satisfactory.
We did standard software development, but we found problems we can't solve, but with narrow-AI there are easy solutions. Now we see problems, we can't solve with narrow-AI, we are using few AGI-ish tools. ... >In the case of bioinformatics, for instance, I believe there are a lot of >highly pertinent patterns in biological data that narrow AI methods are not >seeing. Having software that can see these patterns is of great commercial >value. How full of an AGI one needs for this isn't clear at this point, but >it's clear that one needs something with vastly more general intelligence >than current narrow AI software. We use the same tools for spam-detection and cancel-bots: Clustering, SVMs, decision trees. It reduced our hardware-costs by half. >I find it quite credible that for your business at the moment, the time and >financial cost of going in an AGI direction doesn't make business sense. If >you had funding to just "build stuff" for 3-5 years and then launch a >product and worry about selling it, it would be a different story. We are developing QA-add-ons for our chat-software, we need semi-automatic knowledge extraction. We have 1-2 years to build qa-stuff, imho its AGI-ish. We use CLIPS, NARS-ideas and MuliNet. Its slow, today 30s/sentence on 1 GHz PC. Thats no standalone product to sell, its an add-on for existing software, so its much easier to get the invested money back. >I have doubts about how "robust" you can make narrow-AI chat software. >Unlike narrow-AI chess software, I believe narrow-AI chat software is always >going to basically suck. However, it may serve some specific >narrowly-defined business needs well, in spite of its suckage judged by the >standards of flexible human conversation... Look into community-chats and you'll see how real human conversation sucks. Look into bestselling newspaper and its not much better. With chatter-bot we'll get a paid plattform to experiment with narrow-AI and AGI-ish-Software. We tested a dirty talk bot one year ago, the users wrote us thank-emails. Look at Dadaism, very funny or http://slate.msn.com/?id=76886 (The Complete Bushisms) much more fun. cu Alex ------- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/
