On 1/19/07, Bob Mottram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

My feeling is that this probably isn't a great business idea.  I think
collecting common sense data and building that into a general reasoner
should really be thought of as a long term effort, which is unlikely to
appeal to business investors expecting to see a return within a few years.


In contrast to many business in this internet era, my project seems to need
a low level of funding over a relatively long period of time (eg 5-10
years).  I actually think this is a better business model for AGI (cf Ben's
WebMind story =)).  Funding is of secondary importance to finding the right
partners;  I know quite a few people with VC connections.

If any attempt is made to build a second version of mindpixel, I think the
open source (or open corpus) model would be the obvious choice.  Chris
McKinstry kept his database secret, and for a long time so did Cyc, and as a
consequence those projects saw very little actual usage by anyone.  The more
easily researchers can get their hands on the corpus the more likely is that
some interesting applications will result.


How about this:  the database would be open for anyone to download, for
experimentation or whatever purpose.  Only when someone wants to incorporate
the data in an AGI, would a license fee be needed.  Also I would make the
inference engine etc opensource, again within a commercial context.  This
approach is not so common but I think it gets the best of both worlds.

It might also be worth noting that cross validated common sense
information can be grabbed directly from the internet, from sites like
wikipedia.  I've had a program doing this for quite some time, and the
quality of the data acquired is good.


There might be some gaps in the knowledge you acquired.  If I really run the
project I would also import knowledge acquired from other methods.

YKY

-----
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/?list_id=303

Reply via email to