Matthias,
First, I see both a human body-brain and a distributed entity, such as a
computer network, as *physically integrated* units, with a sense of their
physical integrity. The fascinating thought, (perhaps unrealistic) for me
was of being able to physically look at a scene or scenes, from different
POV's more or less simultaneously - a thought worth exploring.
Second, your idea, AFAICT, of an "unbiassed-as-to-time-and-space"
intelligence, while v. vague, is also worth exploring. I suspect the
all-important fallacy here is of "pure objectivity" - the idea that an
object or scene or world can be depicted WITHOUT any location or reference
or comparison. When we talk of time and space, which are fictions that have
no concrete existence - we are really talking (no?) of frameworks we use to
locate and refer other things to. Clocks. 3/4 dimensional grids... All
things have to be referred and compared to other things in order to be
understood, which is an inevitably "biassed" process. So is there any such
thing as your non-bias? Just my first stumbling thoughts.
Matthias:
From my points 1. and 2. it should be clear that I was not talking about a
distributed AGI which is in NO place. The AGI you mean consists of several
parts which are in different places. But this is already the case with the
human body. The only difference is, that the parts of the distributed AGI
can be placed several kilometers from each other. But this is only a
quantitative and not a qualitative point.
Now to my statement of an useful representation of space and time for AGI.
We know, that our intuitive understanding of space and time works very well
in our life. But the ultimate goal of AGI is that it can solve problems
which are very difficult for us. If we give an AGI bias of a model of space
and time which is not state of the art of the knowledge we have from
physics, then we give AGI a certain limitation which we ourselves suffer
from and which is not necessary for an AGI.
This point has nothing to do with the question whether the AGI is
distributed or not.
I mentioned this point because your question has relations to the more
fundamental question whether and which bias we should give AGI for the
representation of space and time.
Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Mike Tintner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gesendet: Samstag, 4. Oktober 2008 14:13
An: agi@v2.listbox.com
Betreff: Re: [agi] I Can't Be In Two Places At Once.
Matthias: I think it is extremely important, that we give an AGI no bias
about
space and time as we seem to have.
Well, I (& possibly Ben) have been talking about an entity that is in many
places at once - not in NO place. I have no idea how you would swing that -
other than what we already have - machines that are information-processors
with no sense of identity at all.Do you?
-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription:
https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription:
https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription:
https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=114414975-3c8e69
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
