> > In other words, maybe what you think needs to be gotten from grounding > > in a nonlinguistic domain, could somehow be gotten indirectly via grounding > > in masses of text? > > > > I am not confident this is feasible, nor that it isn't ... and it's > > not the approach > > I'm following ... but I'm uncomfortable dismissing it out of hand... > > *nods* I'm comfortable dismissing it out of hand, for several reasons, > not least of which is that we humans do not and cannot do anything > remotely resembling what you're proposing.
I don't assume that all successful AGI's must be humanlike... > At the end of the day, the Internet just doesn't contain most of the > needed information. Consider the question of whether it's possible to > learn about water flowing downhill, from Internet text alone. From > Google (example not original to me, though I forget who first ran this > test): > > Results 1 - 10 of about 864 for "water flowing downhill" > Results 1 - 10 of about 2,130 for "water flowing uphill" > > The prosecution rests :) Google is not an AGI, so I have no idea why you think this proves anything about AGI ... I strongly suspect there is enough information in the text online for an AGI to learn that water flows downhill in most circumstances, without having explicit grounding... -- Ben ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=95818715-a78a9b Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
