----- Original Message ----- From: "Eugen Leitl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 10:26 AM Subject: Re: [agi] My proposal for an AGI agenda
> > A CPU executes instructions including assignment, conditionals and simple > > looping. How can a language not have these things and still be useful. > > Does the human brain tissue have assignments, conditionals, and simple looping? > I don't think it does, and yet it is good enough that I can understand your > message (at least I think so) by the feat of Natural Intelligence. As I have stated before, computers and people aren't similar. If you create hardware that acts in ways like it's biological counterpart then my current ideas wouldn't be appropriate. Can you argue that widely available computers (the one I am using to send you this email) don't have looping etc? > If you look at provably optimal computing substrates, they're very > far removed from what you would consider computation. A classical > approach looks a look like a silicon compiler, only on a 3d lattice. > Signal timing and gates are discrete though, which removes any parasitary/ > dirt effects from design. I enjoy this kind of information but it doesn't help me with my AGI design. I want an AGI design that models the higher level aspects of our cognition and how it actually gets there doesn't have to have anything to do with our brains. I am glad that you want to build a machine and software to create intelligence from the bottom up but that is not my approach. Unlike some others, I wouldn't hazard a guess as to your success potential but your approach isn't mine. > Does your language allow you to do asynchronous message passing (no shared > memory) across a signalling mesh, involving millions and billions of > asynchronous, concurrent units? My AGI and my language was never designed to have "millions and billions of asynchronous, concurrent units". My design certainly has the ability for run a few thousand events simultaneously and pass messages efficiently between them but this is not what you are asking. My language would be totally inadequate for the kind of solution you envision but I would argue that for the kinds of systems I envision, current languages are equally ill-suited. I have a summary of the features in my system and some examples concerning why Lisp wasn't suitable at www.rccconsulting.com/aihal.htm -- David Clark ----- 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
