Not quite sure why you responded quite so virulently.
In fact, there is an important, distinctive point here. AI/AGI machines may
be "uncertain," (usually quantifiably so), about how to learn an activity.
Humans are, to some extent, fundamentally "confused." We, typically, don't
just watch and listen to one person engaging in a skilled activity, (which
is what your and the prevailing analysis implies) - but to several people,
who have not just different but fundamentally conflicting practices and
philosophies - and we're not sure about how to resolve those conflicts. Take
AGI itself - like any field of human endeavour it is riddled with
conflicting ideas. Everyone is to at least some extent confused about how to
proceed, and whether to revise their current practices and approaches.
(And that's because the activity like every human activity is a)
fundamentally pluralistic and allows for conflicting approaches, which are
b) always imperfect, with cons as well as pros) .
I'm not aware of any AI or AGI machine that is "confused" like humans - are
you?
But that confusion, I'm suggesting, is at the heart of human adaptivity.
Josh: Mike Tintner wrote:
Josh: An AGI needs to be able to watch someone doing something and
produce a
program such that it can now do the same thing.
Sounds neat and tidy. But that's not the way the human mind does it.
A vacuous statement, since I stated what needs to be done, not how to do
it.
We start from ignorance and confusion about how to perform any given
skill/
activity
Particularly how to build an AGI :-)
- and while we then acquire an enormous amount of relevant
routines - we never build a whole module or program for any activity.
If what you're trying to say is "nobody's perfect", well, duh.
If you're trying to say humans don't actually acquire skills, speak for
yourself.
We "never stop learning", whether we're committed to that attitude
philosophically or not.
Some of us never *start* learning...
And we never stop being confused.
FDSN.
Are you certain about how best to write programs? Or have sex?
Or a conversation? Or play chess? Or tennis? All our activities, like
those,
demand and repay a lifetime's study. An AGI will have to have a similar
approach to enjoy any success.
How stupid of me not to realize that my vague ideas on how to build a
program
that can learn by watching, would not instantly achieve superhuman,
Godlike,
mathematically optimal performance on every possible task at first sight.
I am awed by the brilliance of this insight.
-----
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=8660244&id_secret=55610337-066caf
