I updated my AGI proposal from a few days ago. http://www.mattmahoney.net/agi2.html
There are two major changes. First I clarified the routing strategy and justified it on an information theoretic basis. An organization is optimally efficient when its members specialize with no duplication of knowledge or skills. To achieve this, we use a market economy to trade messages where information has negative value. It is mutually beneficial for peers to trade messages when the receivers can compress them more tightly than the senders. This results in convergence to an optimal mapping of peers to clusters of data in semantic space. The routing strategy is for a peer to use cached messages from its neighbors as estimates of the neighbor's database. For a message X and each neighbor j, it computes the distance D(X,Y_j) where Y_j is a concatenation of cached messages from peer j. Then it routes X to j because it estimates that j can store X most efficiently. Routing stops when j is itself. The distance function is non-mutual information: D(X,Y) = K(X|Y) + K(Y|X) where K is Kolmogorov complexity, the size of the shortest program that can output X or Y given the other message as input. When I wrote my thesis, I assumed a vector space language model, but I just now realized that D is a measure, compatible with Euclidean distance in the vector space model. K is not computable, but we can approximate K using the output size of a text compressor. The economic model rewards good compression algorithms. The second change is a new section (5) addressing long term safety. I think I have debunked RSI, proving that the friendly seed AI approach could not work even in theory. This leaves an evolutionary improvement model in which peers compete for resources in a hostile environment. The other risks I have identified are competition from uploads with property rights, intelligent worms, and a singularity that redefines humanity making the question of human extinction moot. I don't have good solutions to these risks. I did not mention all possible risks, e.g. gray goo. To answer Mike Tintner's remark, yes, $1 quadrillion is expensive, but I think that AGI will pay for itself many times over. It won't address the basic instability and unpredictability of speculative investment markets. It will probably make matters worse by enabling nonstop automated trading and waves of panic selling traveling at the speed of light. As before, comments are welcome. -- Matt Mahoney, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------- 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=117534816-b15a34 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
