>>In my opinion, instead of having to cherry-pick desirable and undesirable traits in an unconscious AGI entity, that we, of course, wish to have consciousness and cognitive abilites like reasoning, deductive and inductive logic comprehension skills, emotional traits, compassion, ethics, street smarts, and the like, requires the following protocols: We model AGI after the most successful living (and non-living) humans. That way, we will be able to pretty much predict how they will react in various situations; for example, we would not want to make a "George W. Bush" AGI. We would, however, make the "Bill Clinton," "David m. Cash," "Angelina Jolie," and so on. Why reinvent the wheel when we have perfect examples of successful intelligence in front of us everyday and in our history books. There will have to be some ground rules though: no major world religious figures, no rapists or child molestors, etc. I will begin work on compiling a list of likely candidates for the new project, which is already underway in Finland with several of my colleagues. By the way, my name is David M. Cash, otherwise known on the Internet as "DC" or "DMC". On a final note, I feel that each AGI should have an independent personality, not some slavelike borgish slave mind that is easily manipulated or controlled. Furthermore, in creation of this industry standard framework for the AGI mind, I elect we only use Commercial Open Source Software or regular Open Source Software. This project is too important to be left in the hands of just one or a few corporations (i.e. Microsoft, Cisco, Sun) who would inevitably taint the project with corporate greed and shareholder interests, which would hamper and ultimately destroy the proper development of the new "Atlantis Project". So let's call it Project Atlantis from now on if that is ok with everyone.......
On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 7:58 AM, Bob Mottram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 04/03/2008, Mark Waser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> But the question is whether the internal knowledge representation of > > the AGI needs to allow ambiguities, or should we use an ambiguity-free > > representation. It seems that the latter choice is better. > > > > An excellent point. But what if the representation is natural language > > with pointers to the specific intended meaning of any words that are > > possibly ambiguous? That would seem to be the best of both worlds. > > > > > This is fine provided that the AGI lives inside a chess-like ambiguity > free world, which could be a simulation or maybe some abstract data mining > environment. > > ------------------------------ > *agi* | Archives <http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> > <http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/> | > Modify<http://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription > <http://www.listbox.com> > ------------------------------------------- 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
