Hi YKY,
I do think a MindPixel type KB could potentially be useful for AGI,
but, I don't think it could come close to providing all the knowledge
required for an AGI. It may be a useful help to AGI systems, but
IMO it will never be a central aspect of an AGI project.
Regarding licensing: I think the project would stand maximal odds of
success if the KB were simply made open-source under a very open
license allowing everyone free usage. That would encourage the
maximum number of contributors, I feel.
If this is not OK with you, you could try a license that gives your
company exclusive commercial rights, but allows others unlimited free
usage for noncommercial purposes. But then for instance Novamente
could not use it without paying you ;-) ... making the situation
similar to the situation with Cyc's KB...
My own view is that a KB like you suggest is a decent way to advance
science, and a poor way to make money. I think you should just make
it free and open for all uses. But, of course, it's your project and
you must follow your own judgment !
-- Ben G
On Jan 27, 2007, at 2:19 PM, YKY (Yan King Yin) wrote:
On 1/27/07, Philip Goetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Totally disagree! I actually examined a few cases of *real-life*
> commonsense inference steps,
> >and I found that they are based on a *small* number of tiny
rules of
> thought. I don't know why
> >you think "massive" knowledge items are needed for commonsense
> reasoning -- if you closely
> >examine some of your own thoughts you'd see.
>
> On 1/19/07, YKY (Yan King Yin) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> > For the type of common sense reasoner I described, we need a
*massive*
> > number of rules. You can either acquire these rule via machine
learning or
> > direct encoding. Machine learning of such rules is possible,
but the area
> > of research is kind of immature. OTOH there has not been a
massive project
> > to collect such rules by hand. So that explains why my type of
system has
> > not been tried before.
Sorry about the confusion =) What I meant is that the AGI's
knowledgebase needs to store a massive number of facts/rules, but a
*single* commonsense inference case (eg the examples from my
introspection) usually involves only a few deductive steps in logic
(assuming the required rules are there).
I guess Ben's objection is based on the first point, but the
project is still feasible if it is powered by an online community,
IMO.
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
-----
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
