Philip Hunt wrote:
2008/12/20 Ben Goertzel <b...@goertzel.org>:
Well, there is massively more $$ going into robotics dev than into AGI dev,
and no one seems remotely near to solving the hard problems
Which is not to say it's a bad area of research, just that it's a whole
other huge confusing R&D can of worms
So I still say, the choices are
-- virtual embodiment, as I advocate
-- delay working on AGI for a decade or so, and work on robotics now instead
(where by robotics I include software work on low-level sensing and actuator
control)
Either choice makes sense but I prefer the former as I think it can get us
to the end goal faster.
That makes sense
But, with actuation, I'm not so sure. The almost total absence of touch and
kinesthetics in current robots is a huge impediment, and puts them at a huge
disadvantage relative to humans.
Good point.
I wonder how easy it would be to provide a robot with a sensor that
gives a sense of touch? maybe something the thickness of a sheet of
paper, with horizontal and vertical wires criss-crossing it, and the
wires not electrically connected would work, if there was a difference
in capacitance when the wires where further apart or closer together.
How about:
http://www.geekologie.com/2006/06/nanoparticles_give_robots_prec.php
or
http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=163701010
Richard Loosemore
-------------------------------------------
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
