Mark Waser wrote: >>>>>> Can we get a listing of what you believe these limitations are and whether or not you believe that they apply to humans?
I believe that humans are constrained by *all* the limits of finite automata yet are general intelligences so I'm not sure of your point. <<<<<<<< It is also my opinion that humans are constrained by *all* the limits of finite automata. But I do not agree that most humans can be scientists. If this is necessary for general intelligence then most humans are not general intelligences. It depends on your definition of general intelligence. Surely there are rules (=algorithms) to be a scientist. If not, AGI would not be possible and there would not be any scientist at all. But you cannot separate the rules (algorithm) from the evaluation whether a human or a machine is intelligent. Intelligence comes essentially from these rules and from a lot of data. The mere ability to use arbitrary rules does not imply general intelligence. Your computer has this ability but without the rules it is not intelligent at all. - Matthias ------------------------------------------- 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
