Benjamin Goertzel wrote:
Are you implying that there is a definition of intelligence that allows
things to be classified according to their DEGREE of intelligence, with
thermostats at one end and humans at the other?
I believe the "maximizing complex functions dependent on complex
environments" does that, yes.
But it's not a pragmatically useful definition because measuring
complexity is itself a really hard problem ... it becomes either
computationally
intractable or subjective
And with *no* "obviously" unintelligent systems (like supercomplicated
optimizing programs) right up there with humans?
I don't see why a supercomplicated optimization program shouldn't be
considered intelligent, if it could optimize a wide variety of hard problems
dependent on complex environments...
Nothing changed: the definition is still pointless.
What is becoming pointless is spending too much time arguing on email
rather than working on my AGI design and system.
Talk to ya later ;-)
Ben
More pointless even than that is chasing around in circular discussions,
where the subject is changed incessantly in spite of my best efforts to
keep it focused on the the claim that I actualy made.
Richard Loosemore.
-----
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/?member_id=231415&user_secret=fabd7936
