Thanks!
That's the "trouble" with wikipedia - you think you have half an idea
(although I certainly wouldn't rate the thought below of mine as an idea)
and some bugger has already had it. About a year ago, I was getting into the
open source movement and realising how huge its effects would be, and
thought "Ah... open source religion..(real religion)" ... and there already
in wikip. was an entry and a whole movement. (Not a particularly good
movement though).
So, ATM, is anyone following up on your ideas and sourceforge framework?
I like that you are thinking top-down in terms of mind modules - I doubt
that any literal approach to integration in terms of "let's find ways of
connecting up what we've already got..and getting everything to talk to each
other" will possibly work. Everything will presumably have to be redesigned
to a greater or lesser extent.
I should stress that the challenge here of defining some integrational
structure for AGI is a hugely creative one (including the business of
simplying defining the mind and body modules or parts). No relatively
simple, straightforward literal solution will work. The challenge for Jimmy
Wales of developing a structure for Wikipedia was extremely simple and easy
by comparison.
And what all this helps focus on is a huge related challenge for neurology
and biology. The great thing that evolution has already achieved is of
course to solve this problem - to find ways that all the subsystems of the
mind and body can talk to each other. Has anyone focussed the challenge of
understanding nature's communication/integration systems? (Or, to put it
another way, where's the entry in wikip. ?)
I'm just realing Hawkins "On INtelligence" and of course, one of the big
ideas he pushes - if you'll forgive my still-absorbing, still-garbled
account - is Mountcastle's that the different senses are neurologically
structured in the same ways, although I can't remember whether he links this
up to show how they also interrelate. (Comments here would be extremely
welcome).
Of course, as someone I think just pointed out, the Internet solved the
multimedia problem of how most of the enormously disparate kinds of
information and media that existed could be brought together in a single
medium of communication.
That positively demands a comparable solution for AGI.
----- Original Message -----
From: "A. T. Murray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 4:55 AM
Subject: Re: [agi] Open-Source AGI
Mike Tintner wrote:
The greatest challenge - and these are my first,
very stumbling thoughts here - is to find ways that
people can work together on the overall problem -
that all these systems (or subsystems) that people
are working on can connect and evolve together.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligence_systems_integration
says that "[I]ntegrating what's already available is
a more logical approach to broader A.I. than
building monolithic systems from scratch."
That's the only way that even an adaptive robotic worm
[or equivalent] will be produced. (And a common systems/
common parts approach is after all that used by evolution itself).
http://mind.sourceforge.net/aisteps.html breaks the AGO problem
down into discrete mind-modles for specialists to work on.
ATM
--
http://www.advogato.org/person/mentifex/
-----
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/?&;
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.6.6/795 - Release Date: 09/05/2007
15:07
-----
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
