Oops heh I was eating French toast as I wrote this - "intelligence (or the application of) or even perhaps consciousness is the real-time surfing of "buttery effects""
I meant "butterfly effects". John > -----Original Message----- > From: John G. Rose [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2007 11:45 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [agi] Intelligence vs Efficient Intelligence > > I'm probably not answering your question but have been thinking more on > all > this. > > There's the usual thermodynamics stuff and relativistic physics that is > going on with intelligence and flipping bits within this universe, > verses > the "no-friction" universe or Newtonian setup. > > But what I've been thinking and this is probably just reiterating what > someone else has worked through but basically a large part of > intelligence > is chaos control, chaos feedback loops, operating within complexity. > Intelligence is some sort of delicate multi-vectored balancing act > between > complexity and projecting, manipulating, storing/modeling, NN training, > genetic learning of the chaos and applying chaos in an environment and > optimizing it's understanding and application of. The more intelligent, > the > better handle an entity has on the chaos. An intelligent entity can > have > maximal effect with minimal energy expenditure on its environment in a > controlled manner; intelligence (or the application of) or even perhaps > consciousness is the real-time surfing of "buttery effects". > > So efficient intelligence involves thermodynamic power differentials of > resource consumption applied to goals, etc. A goal would be expressed > similarly to intelligence formulae. Really efficient means good chaos > leverage understanding cycles, systems, entropy goings on over time and > maximizing effect with minimal I/O control for goal achievement while > utilizing the KR and the entity's resources... > > John > > > > From: Matt Mahoney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > I guess people want intelligence to be useful, not just complex :-) > > > > This raises a question. Suppose you had a very large program > consisting > > of > > random instructions. Such a thing would have high algorithmic > > complexity, but > > most people would not say that such a thing was intelligent (depending > > on > > their favorite definition). But how would you know? If you didn't > know > > how > > the code was generated, then how would you know that the program was > > really > > random and didn't actually solve some very hard class of problems? > > > ----- > 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/?&; ----- 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
