Re: [agi] A theorem of change and persistence????
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 12:29:10PM +1100, Philip Sutton wrote: Co-evolution of AGI populations guarantees unpredictability, and an arms race in capabilities. Provided there is indeed a population of AGIs and not just one. You can't keep clones synchronous in a relativistic universe. Growth of any kind is fraught with fragmentation -- and of course any plausible AGI scenario would involve co-evolution in the global network to start with. But even if there was just one AGI - diversity would most likely develop within the brain of the AGI - unless the AGI itself decided not to think about diverse dynamics - effectively to go into a coma. My guess is that thinking about diverse dynamics (eg. modelling hypothetical behaviours of virtual autonomous agents) would recreate at least some degree of uncertainty. Sort of along the lines that if the diversity isn't 'out there' in the real universe, then it will be 'in here' in the mind of the super AGI - so the mind of the super AGI becomes the 'ground' for a new domain of diversity, evolution and uncertainty. I think postbiology will have dramatically more diversity and evolutionary dynamics, not less. -- Eugen* Leitl a href=http://leitl.org;leitl/a __ ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE http://moleculardevices.org http://nanomachines.net --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED] pgpHq60hbTF1V.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: [agi] A theorem of change and persistence????
Hi Ben, If you model a system in approximate detail then potentially you can avoid big surprises and have only small surprises. In chaotic systems, my guess is that compact models would capture many possibilities that would otherwise be surprises - especially in the near term. But I think it's unlikely that these models would capture all the big potential surprises leaving only small surprises to happen. I would imagine that compact models would fail to capture at least some lower-probability very big surprises. If a super-AI were reshaping the universe, it could reshape the universe in such a way that from that point on, the dynamics of the universe would be reasonably well predictable via compact approximative models. In fact this would probably be a clever thing to do, assuming it could be done without sacrificing too much of the creative potential of the universe... My guess is that, to make the universe a moderately predictable place, creativity would have to be kept at a very low level - with only creativity space for one super-AGI. Trying to knock the unpredictability out of the universe could be engaging for a super-AGI (that was so inclined) for a while (given the resistance it would encounter). But I reckon the super-AGI might find a moderately predictable universe fairly unstimulating in the long run. Cheers, Philip --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [agi] A theorem of change and persistence????
If a super-AI were reshaping the universe, it could reshape the universe in such a way that from that point on, the dynamics of the universe would be reasonably well predictable via compact approximative models. In fact this would probably be a clever thing to do, assuming it could be done without sacrificing too much of the creative potential of the universe... My guess is that, to make the universe a moderately predictable place, creativity would have to be kept at a very low level - with only creativity space for one super-AGI. Trying to knock the unpredictability out of the universe could be engaging for a super-AGI (that was so inclined) for a while (given the resistance it would encounter). But I reckon the super-AGI might find a moderately predictable universe fairly unstimulating in the long run. Cheers, Philip Well, you might be right. But this comes down to you and me speculating about the aesthetic preferences of a massively superhuman being, and I really doubt the accuracy of either of our speculations in this regard ;-) -- Ben --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [agi] A theorem of change and persistence????
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 02:52:50AM +1100, Philip Sutton wrote: My guess is that, to make the universe a moderately predictable place, creativity would have to be kept at a very low level - with only creativity space for one super-AGI. Trying to knock the unpredictability out of the universe could be engaging for a super-AGI (that was so inclined) for a while (given the resistance it would encounter). But I reckon the super-AGI might find a moderately predictable universe fairly unstimulating in the long run. Co-evolution of AGI populations guarantees unpredictability, and an arms race in capabilities. -- Eugen* Leitl a href=http://leitl.org;leitl/a __ ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE http://moleculardevices.org http://nanomachines.net --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED] pgpJRbVlmIvS6.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: [agi] A theorem of change and persistence????
It seems to me that the only way to 'model' the universe is to use the real whole-universe - so a whole-universe intelligence would not have enough computing power to model itself in complete detail therefore the future would still hold surprises that the whole-universe intelligence would need to expend energy on to manage - while its internal low entropy lasted. But you don't need to model a system in complete detail to avoid big surprises. If you model a system in approximate detail then potentially you can avoid big surprises and have only small surprises. This depends on how good your model is, and what the system's dynamics are like. If a super-AI were reshaping the universe, it could reshape the universe in such a way that from that point on, the dynamics of the universe would be reasonably well predictable via compact approximative models. In fact this would probably be a clever thing to do, assuming it could be done without sacrificing too much of the creative potential of the universe... -- Ben G --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [agi] A theorem of change and persistence????
Hi Ben, On 23 Dec you said: I would say that if the universe remains configured roughly as it is now, then your statement (that long-term persistence requires goal-directed effort) is true. However, the universe could in the future find itself in a configuration in which your statement was FALSE, either -- via self-organization, or -- via the goal-directed activity of an intelligent system, which then stopped being goal-directed after it had set the universe in a configuration where its persistence could continue without goal-directed effort Taking the last first.. wouldn't option 2 require the intelligent system to end the evolution of the universe to achieve this result..ie. bring on the heat death of the universe! I can't see why 'self-organisation' would lead to a universe where persistence through deep time of apects of the universe that an intelligence favours did not require goal directed effort/expenditure of energy. How could you see this happening? Even if the intelligence actually absorbed the whole of the universe into itself I think my theorum would still hold - because a whole-universe intelligence would find it's internal sub-systems still evolving in surprising ways. It seems to me that the only way to 'model' the universe is to use the real whole-universe - so a whole-universe intelligence would not have enough computing power to model itself in complete detail therefore the future would still hold surprises that the whole-universe intelligence would need to expend energy on to manage - while its internal low entropy lasted. Cheers, Philip --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [agi] A theorem of change and persistence????
On Sun, 19 Dec 2004, Ben Goertzel wrote: Hmmm... Philip, I like your line of thinking, but I'm pretty reluctant to extend human logic into the wildly transhuman future... Ben, this isn't so much about logic as it is about thermodynamics and it's going to be a very long time indeed before we can get around that one. Phil's idea comes down to stating that the entity will need to exert energy to counteract local entropy in order to remain a coherent being. I'd agree and state a trivial extension: The larger the sphere (in physical or some other space) of entropy that the entity is counteracting by expending energy, the greater it's chance of survival. Consider humanity, let's assume we'll survive as a species long as the earth remains intact. We're still vulnerable from asteroids (admittedly a miniscule chance). If we extend our sphere of control of entropy into space (by building gizmos and whatsits to protect the earth), we further increase our chance of deep time survival. We've made a bubble of entropy control around the earth. I'd also put forth this one: it's more energy efficient to ensure deep time longevity by reproduction than by protection. There's a book called the Robot's Rebellion which espouses the view that humans are a deep-time survival mechanism for our DNA. I haven't read it yet, but it sounds right on target for this topic. -Brad --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [agi] A theorem of change and persistence????
The Robot's Rebellion : Finding Meaning in the Age of Darwin by Keith E. Stanovich University of Chicago Press (May 15, 2004) ISBN: 0226770893 Cheers, Philip I'm glad you looked this up and posted it, as there are two books titled The Robot's Rebellion, the other being a very controversial attack on organized religion. --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [agi] A theorem of change and persistence????
Hmmm... Philip, I like your line of thinking, but I'm pretty reluctant to extend human logic into the wildly transhuman future... The very idea of separating persistence from change is an instance of human-culture thinking that may not apply to the reasoning of a transhuman being. Consider for instance that quantum logic handles disjunctions (A or B) quite differently than ordinary Boolean logic. What kind of logic might a massively transhuman mind apply? -- Ben - Original Message - From: Philip Sutton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 12:01 PM Subject: [agi] A theorem of change and persistence I think I might have just worked out a basic theorem of relevance to artificial general intelligences. I'd be interested to know what you think. Let's postulate that an AGI is created that is committed to generating change in the universe (possibly fast or even accelerating change). Let's also postulate that this AGI wishes to persist through deep time (and/or that the AGI wishes some other entity or attribute to persist through deep time - note: this bracketted addendum is not necessary for the argument if the AGI wishes itself to persist). In the face of a changing world, where there is at least one thing that the AGI wishes to survive with (effectively) 100% certainty through deep time, then the AGI will need to *systematically* generate a stream of changes that 'locally' offset the general change in the universe sufficient to enable the chosen thing to persist. Conclusion: This means that an AGI that wants to persist through deep time (or that wants anything else to persist through deep time) will need to devote sufficient thinking and action time and resources to successfully managing its persistence agenda. In a reality of resource constraints, the AGI will need to become highly efficient at pursuing its persistence agenda (given the tendency for changes in the universe to radiate/multiply) and it will (most likely) need to manage its broader change promotion agenda so as not to make its persistence agenda too hard to fulfill. What do you think? Cheers, Philip --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
