Replying to Shane, I wrote:
> As an AGI designer, Hutter's work tells me NOTHING of any use.  In that
> sense I feel it's "not that big a deal."  On the other hand, it's
> excellent
> math/science, and it's part of a large process that may
> eventually lead to a
> deep useful general theory of AGI.  In that sense it's certainly
> worthwhile.

One place where our intuitions may differ, Shane, is that I don't think a
deep general theory of AGI is going to be necessary to create a powerful
AGI.

The theory of aerodynamics is wonderful, but it wasn't needed to create
airplanes....   A practical rather than abstract understanding of
aerodynamics
was adequate.  I think the situation is similar.

Furthermore, if we create an adequate AGI, then we'll never need to invent
the math theory required to create an awesome AGI -- because the AGI will
invent this  math itself, or help us to do so ;-)

-- Ben G

-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, 
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to