Hmmm. If Goldbach's conjecture is true (and provable), the program will loop forever and is provably non-intelligent. If it's false, there's a counterexample and it's intelligent. (Assuming you mean by "halt" to go on to the AIXItl part). The overall program is only a stumper if Goldbach is undecideable.
Perhaps a better example would be a program that applied the formal definition of intelligence to its own code, then running Eliza if the result said intelligent and AIXItl if the result said non-intelligent. Josh On Tuesday 15 May 2007 01:36:21 pm Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote: > Shane Legg wrote: > > > > Thus I think that the analogue of Gödel's theorem here would be > > something more like: For any formal definition of intelligence > > there will exist a form of intelligence that cannot be proven to be > > intelligent even though it is intelligent. > > With unlimited computing power this is obvious. Take a computation > that halts if it finds an even number that is not the sum of two > primes. Append AIXItl. QED. > > -- > Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ > Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence > ----- 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
