Yes, that is what No. 6 is about. The situation is made worse by the "AI has been solved" claims on the web from different places.
Pei On 9/13/06, Stephen Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I would add that previous more-or-less general AI projects have not greatly exceeded their modest expectations. So given this experience perhaps there is a tendency among potential sponsors to classify new AGI projects as crackpot schemes. -Steve --- Pei Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Good question. > > I and Ben are drafting an introductory chapter for > the AGIRI Workshop > Proceedings, and in it we want to list the major > objections to AGI > research, then reject them one by one. Now the list > includes the > following: > > 1. "AGI is impossible" --- such as the opinions from > Lucas, Dreyfus, > and Penrose > > 2. "There is no such a thing as general > intelligence" --- > psychological arguments against any "g factor", and > AI arguments > against any "general problem solver" > > 3. "General-purpose systems are not as good as > special-purpose ones" > --- in terms of performance, efficiency, etc. > > 4. "AGI is already included in the current AI" --- > "Since X plays an > important role in intelligence, studying X > contributes to the study of > intelligence in general", where X can be replaced by > reasoning, > learning, planning, perceiving, acting, etc. > > 5. "It is too early to work on AGI" --- we should > wait for more > results from individual AI sub-fields, brain > research, hardware > innovations, ... > > 6. "AGI is nothing but hype" --- no AGI claim has > got any supporting > evidence in history > > 7. "AGI research is not fruitful" --- it is hard to > get result, > support, reward, ... > > 8. "AGI is dangerous" --- Terminator, Matrix, ... > > Anything else? > > Pei > > > On 9/13/06, Joshua Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'd like to raise a FAQ: Why is so little AGI > research and development being > > done? > > > > The answers of Goertzel, Moravec, Kurzweil, Voss, > and others all agree on > > this (no need to repeat them here), and I've read > Are We Spiritual Machines, > > but I come away unsatisfied. (Still, if there is > nothing more to say on this > > question, please do the AGIRI-equivalent of > sniping this thread > > immediately.) > > > > I respect existing AGI researchers, but I am > surprised that more members of > > the "establishment" are not on board. I just can't > believe that , for > > example, almost all leading > > computer-science/cognitive-science professors are > > herd-following closed-minded stuck-in-the-muds. > The leading universities do > > have their share of creative, free-thinking, > inquisitive people, and the > > same goes for other parts of the "establishment". > > > > > > To clarify what I am looking for, I should > describe a recent conversation. I > > spoke to an open-minded and intelligent friend who > has a PhD from, and does > > research in, a top university. The research is in > exactly the sort of > > technologies used in brain-scanning. I asked him > about Kurzweil's trends on > > the accelerating advance of human-brain-scanning > technologies. He did not > > agree with Kurzweil's conclusions, and explained > why. > > > > Likewise, I'm looking for input from a > open-minded, intelligent, > > computer/cognitive scientist (who does not > strongly support AGI research) on > > the above question. I don't know where to find > them, so perhaps someone on > > this list could role-play one. > > > > What would s/he say if I asked "Why do you not > pursue or support AGI > > research? Even if you believe that implementation > is a long way off, surely > > academia can study, and has studied for thousands > of years, impractical but > > interesting pie-in-the-sky topics, including human > cognition? And AGI, if > > nothing else, models (however partially and > imperfectly with our > > contemporary technology) essential aspects of some > philosophically very > > important problems." > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Joshua > > ________________________________ > > This list is sponsored by AGIRI: > http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe > > or change your options, please go to: > > > http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ----- > This list is sponsored by AGIRI: > http://www.agiri.org/email > To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: > http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
