Mike,

On 5/27/08, Mike Tintner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  Steve:Presuming that you do NOT want to store all of history and
> repeatedly analyze all of it as your future AGI operates, you must accept
> MULTIPLE potentially-useful paradigms, adding new ones and trashing old ones
> as more information comes in. Our own very personal ideas of learning and
> thinking do NOT typically allow for the maintenance of multiple simultaneous
> paradigms, cross-paradigm translation, etc.
>
> Steve,
>
> Some odd thoughts in response to an odd but interesting post :).
>
> 1). A true AGI - incl. every living creature - has to be a SELF-EDUCATOR,
> s.o. who doesn't just learn, but learns how to learn, and that means
>
> 2) A true AGI also has to be a CONSUMER in every sphere of their activities
> - choosing from multiple available paradigms; and to be a mix of different
> paradigms in each area - which is healthy and inevitable.
>
> 3) Every true intelligence is, and can only be, one individual in a SOCIETY
> OF INTELLIGENCES..  -  a consumer in an extensive MARKET of multiple ideas
> and paradigms.; (wouldn't anything less be un-American?)
>
> Correct me, but all the ideas of AGI's that I've seen are about INDIVIDUAL
> isolated minds - single superpowerful computers taking over the world, as
> per the sci-fi movies, that seem to have shaped everyone's thinking.
>

As the one lone holdout here, I have been advocating fixing the brain shorts
that lead to problems, rather than jerking the entire world around to make
brain shorted people happy. This is what professional negotiators call a
"win win solution". Every professional negotiator KNOWS that there is ALWAYS
a win win solution. All reverse reduction ad absurdum does is provide the
PROOF of this, along with some guidance to finding the solution, so there is
no longer any excuse for failing to come up with a win win solution.

>
> Actually, that's an absurdity. The whole story of evolution tells us that
> the problems of living in this world for any species of
> creature/intelligence at any level can only be solved by a SOCIETY of
> individuals.
>

This sure hasn't worked for the last million years or so.

 This whole dimension seems to be entirely missing from AGI.
>

That sure isn't the only thing that is missing from AGI.

We already have BILLIONS of human-scale AGIs running around and are turning
out more at the rate of one per second. Why waste an hour trying to make
still more since we have quite enough, unless of course you are in the
company of a beautiful young woman? Let's instead either
1.  make something USEFUL, like knowledge management programs that do things
that people (and future AGIs) are fundamentally poor at doing, and/or
2.  make something VALUABLE, like life-forever-machines, that may not be
very useful, but at least they might be valuable to rich people who want to
live forever.

It is sure nice that this is a VIRTUAL forum, for if we were all in one room
together, my posting above would probably get me thrashed by the *true* AGI
believers here.

Does anyone here want to throw a virtual stone?

Steve Richfield



-------------------------------------------
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=103754539-40ed26
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

Reply via email to