I completely agree with this characterization, I was just pointing out the importance already-existing generally intelligent entities in providing scaffolding for the system's learning and meta-learning processes.
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 12:25 PM, Mike Tintner <tint...@blueyonder.co.uk>wrote: > Infants *start* with general learning skills - they have to extensively > discover for themselves how to do most things - control head, reach out, > turn over, sit up, crawl, walk - and also have to work out perceptually what > the objects they see are, and what they do... and what sounds are, and how > they form words, and how those words relate to objects - and how language > works > > it is this capacity to keep discovering ways of doing things, that is a > major motivation in their continually learning new activities - continually > seeking novelty, and getting bored with too repetitive activities > > obviously an AGI needs some help.. but at the mo. all projects get *full* > help/ *complete* instructions - IOW are merely dressed up versions of narrow > AI > > no one AFAIK is dealing with the issue of how do you produce a true > "goalseeking" agent who *can* discover things for itself? - an agent, that > like humans and animals, can *find* its way to its goals generally, as well > as to learning new activities, on its own initiative - rather than by > following instructions. (The full instruction method only works in > artificial, controlled environments and can't possibly work in the real, > uncontrollable world - where future conditions are highly unpredictable, > even by the sagest instructor). [Ben BTW strikes me as merely gesturing at > all this]. > > There really can't be any serious argument about this - humans and animals > clearly learn all their activities with v. limited and largely general > rather than step-by-step instructions. > > You may want to argue there is an underlying general program that > effectively specifies every step they must take (good luck) - but with > respect to all their specialist.particular activities, - think having a > conversation, sex, writing a post, an essay, fantasying, shopping, browsing > the net, reading a newspaper - etc etc. - you got and get v. little > step-by-step instruction about these and all your other activities > > So AGI's require a fundamentally and massively different paradigm of > instruction to the program, comprehensive, step-by-step paradigm of narrow > AI. > > [The rock wall/toybox tests BTW are AGI activities, where it is > *impossible* to give full instructions, or produce a formula, whatever you > may want to do]. > > *From:* rob levy <r.p.l...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Wednesday, July 21, 2010 3:56 PM > *To:* agi <agi@v2.listbox.com> > *Subject:* Re: [agi] Of definitions and tests of AGI > > A "child" AGI should be expected to need help learning how to solve many > problems, and even be told what the steps are. But at some point it needs > to have developed general problem-solving skills. But I feel like this is > all stating the obvious. > > On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 11:32 PM, Matt Mahoney <matmaho...@yahoo.com>wrote: > >> Mike, I think we all agree that we should not have to tell an AGI the >> steps to solving problems. It should learn and figure it out, like the way >> that people figure it out. >> >> > *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> > <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
