2008/12/20 Derek Zahn <derekz...@msn.com>: > Ben: > >> Right. My intuition is that we don't need to simulate the dynamics >> of fluids, powders and the like in our virtual world to make it adequate >> for teaching AGIs humanlike, human-level AGI. But this could be >> wrong. > > I suppose it depends on what kids actually learn when making cakes, skipping > rocks, and making a mess with play-dough.
I think that the important cognitive abilities involved are at a simpler level than that. Consider an object, such as a sock or a book or a cat. These objects can all be recognised by young children, even though the visual input coming from trhem chasnges from what angle they're viewed at. More fundamentally, all these objects can change shape, yet humans can still effortlessly recognise them to be the same thing. And this ability doesn't stop with humans -- most (if not all) mammalian species can do it. Until an AI can do this, there's no point in trying to get it to play at making cakes, etc. -- Philip Hunt, <cabala...@googlemail.com> Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ------------------------------------------- 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=123753653-47f84b Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
