On 5/1/07, Mike Tintner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
No, I keep saying - I'm not asking for the odd narrowly-defined task - but rather defining CLASSES of specific problems that your/an AGI will be able to tackle. Part of the definition task should be to explain how if you can solve one kind of problem, then you will be able to solve other distinct kinds.
Did nature have a specific task in mind when our brains evolved? Much like an AGI, we as humans are capable of doing MANY things. To sum it up, AGI could be described as a machine that is capable of using pattern recognition, classification, and analysis to produce better pattern recognition, classification and analysis systems for itself. The results of this apply to every problem that could ever be asked to solve. The traditional approach to AI is to do exactly what you're asking: solve individual problems and build them up until we have something that, on every observable level, is equivalent to a thinking person. For the last 50 years, this hasn't produced any promising results in terms of cognition. It's interesting - & I'm not being in any way critical - that this isn't
getting through.
-- Josh Treadwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] 480-206-3776 ----- 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
