I have to agree that a big problem with the field is a lack of understanding of the problems and how they should be solved. I see too many people pursuing solutions to poorly defined problems and without defining why the solution solves the problem. I even see people pursuing solutions to the wrong problems altogether. I also believe that a strong knowledge of existing methods to solve problems is a hindrance in this research. It makes people not want to start from scratch. They just use a method that work to some degree, but is wrong at its foundation.
Lately I've begun to consider these problems more carefully and directly. What I've found interesting is that even at an extremely simplified level, the solution is not immediately clear. In fact, there are many solutions. So, given so many solutions to even simplified problems, which one is the right one? This is the reason that AGI is so F-ing hard. The reason is that the right solution is not clear from the simplified problem or complete problem. The number of possible solutions increase in a sort of exponential manner as you add new constraints and complexity. What I've decided lately is to analyze several of these possible solutions in a sort of tree and pursue several for simplified versions. I hope to find a pattern and figure out which path to pursue more than others. I think many should be pursued though. Maybe this can be somewhat automated some day. Each solution has pros and cons. There aren't even a limited number of solutions. With creativity, you can probably find an infinite number of solutions to the same problem. This explains why the brain was able to accidentally come upon A solution. It works. Not necessarily the best, but it works quite well after being tested and refined over billions of years of evolution. Dave On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 7:33 AM, Mike Tintner <[email protected]>wrote: > "One of the problems of AI researchers is that too often they start off > with an inadequate > understanding of the *problems* and believe that solutions are only a few > years away. We need an educational system that not only teaches techniques > and solutions, but also an understanding of problems and their difficulty — > which can come from a broader multi-disciplinary education. That could speed > up progress." > A. Sloman > > (& who else keeps saying that?) > *agi* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/> | > Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription > <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=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
