bonjour richard i read your mails.i don't understand your position and your agi theory.can you explain me completely,slowly and argumentaly your theory and your practice?and what are the difference about agi-08 and you ?thanks you
----- Message d'ori--- De : Richard Loosemore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> À : [email protected] Envoyé le : Dimanche, 4 Mai 2008, 21h52mn 34s Objet : Re: [agi] AGI-08 videos Derek Zahn wrote: > > I noticed yesterday that most of the videos of talks and panels from > AGI-08 have been uploaded (http://www.agi-08.org/schedule.php). Big > thanks to the organizers for that! > > I have some difficulty getting into some of the papers but the 10-ish > minute overview talks are by and large quite good, and the panel > discussions are particularly interesting. I feel much better now about > not going to the conference! Hopefully the rest of the talks will be > posted, I can't wait to watch them. > > Some personal reactions to particular things: > > * Finally, I think the field has moved beyond the need for so many > papers on "six secrets of AI", "five reasons AI has failed", and so on. > Even the obligatory "What is AI?" talk was largely redundant (although > Dr. Wang's point -- that we will all have different definitions and we > should take that into account when studying the work of others -- needs > saying). This is good news. Perhaps next year's conference won't need > so many overview talks. > > * Somehow I had this vague notion that SOAR had basically dried up and > blown away in the 1990s, but John Laird's description of current work in > SOAR was terrific and quite exciting. I'll be following their progress > closely. > > * There are now quite a number of architectures with AGI-type ambitions > that have significant implementation behind them (Novamente, SOAR, LIDA, > NARS, OSCAR, BICA, Texai, and others). The most interesting parts of > the panels for me was when the people involved in building those > architectures discussed what they have in common and differences in > approach for similar problems. As Ben Goertzel (and Sam Adams and > others) point out, these architectures share quite a lot at the level of > their "boxes and arrows" overview slides, which provides some context > for interesting detailed discussion. If such discussion occurred on > this list that would be really cool; but perhaps a workshop at AGI-09 > where the architects of these actually-existing systems discussed their > similarities and differences and current limitations would be > worthwhile. I'd sure pay to see it! > > * It was quite interesting to see that simulation/visualization as an > important operating principle / reasoning mechanism is becoming so > popular. Ideally, I suppose, such modal mechanisms would do double duty > in perception and simulation... accomplishing that and interfacing it > cleanly with other modalities or general-purpose knowledge > representation is really fascinating and I have a feeling we'll be > seeing more along those lines. I wonder if Novamente will go sort of > solipsistic and absorb AGISim into itself as a modal reasoning module. > > * Along those lines, there seems to be a growing (certainly not > universal) consensus among complete-system builders that virtual > embodiment is a "best approach" for providing broad knowledge support > (grounding) without messing around with robots. Somebody could write an > excellent paper about the potential pitfalls of such an approach > (detail, fidelity, deep causality issues behind appearance, function, > and inter-object + inter-feature relationships, and so on). If nobody > else is working in detail on publishing such an analysis perhaps I will > study those issues for some months and try to write something for AGI-09 > about it. > > * Stephen Reed is one of the most clear and deliberate speakers I've > seen in this field. It's really interesting how seeing a person talk > about their research makes it seem more real and interesting than just > reading about it. > > * I wish Josh's Variac paper wasn't just a poster... but I suppose > something has to get left out. Hopefully next year there will be more > concrete implementation/experimentation progress to report in a talk. > > * Limiting people to 10-12 minutes makes it basically impossible to > present the contents of a paper, so the talks turn into project > overviews. Actually I found that to be a GOOD thing, and hope it > continues that way (as long as we don't get the same overview talks year > after year...) > > * Some presenters were very effective and some were not. I encourage > everybody to rehearse their talks to make sure that the amount of > material presented is appropriate to the time frame, and to make sure it > is presented smoothly. > > Thanks to the organizers and all the participants. Fantastic stuff. Prompted by your enthusiastic write-up, I just wasted one and a half hours scanning through all of the AGI-08 papers that I downloaded previously. I have 28 of them; they did not include anything from Stephen Reed, nor any NARS paper, so I guess my collection must be incomplete, but even so.... I saw absolutely nothing that makes me believe that a field called "Artificial General Intelligence" even exists yet. To the extent that there were any proposals concerning complete architectures, those proposals were completely arbitrary, in the sense that they were plucked out of thin air with no reasons given to indicate that they would be any different to similar proposals plucked in like fashion 20 years ago. People do not even have a common LANGUAGE within which they could discuss the question of whether these papers are arbitrary pet projects of their creators, or something deeper. Does anyone here understanding what I mean by that? Richard Loosemore ------------------------------------------- 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/?&; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? En finir avec le spam? Yahoo! Mail vous offre la meilleure protection possible contre les messages non sollicités http://mail.yahoo.fr Yahoo! Mail ------------------------------------------- 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=101455710-f059c4 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
