On 12/12/07, James Ratcliff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This would allow a large amount of knowledge to be extracted in a
> distributed manner, keeping track of the quality of information gathered
> from each person as a trust metric, and many facts would be gathered and
> checked for truth.
>
I had been thinking about something along these lines, though not worded as you
have in this message yet.
What I would be most interested in at this point is a knowledge gathering
system somewhere along these lines, where the main AGI could be
centralized/clustered or distributed, but where que
--- Jean-Paul Van Belle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Matt, Wonderful idea, now it will even show the typical human trait of
> lying...when i ask it "do you still love me?" most answers in its database
> will have Yes as an answer but when i ask it 'what's my name?' it'll call
> me John?
My pr
Hi Matt, Wonderful idea, now it will even show the typical human trait of
lying...when i ask it "do you still love me?" most answers in its database will
have Yes as an answer but when i ask it 'what's my name?' it'll call me John?
However, your approach is actually already being implemented to
--- Jean-Paul Van Belle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Matt
>
> You call it an AGI proposal but it is described as a distributed search
> algorithms that (merely) appears intelligent i.e. "design for an
> Internet-wide message posting and search service". There doesn't appear to
> be any groundi
Thanks Matt!
-Original Message-
From: Matt Mahoney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 11:42 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: RE: Distributed search (was RE: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re:
[agi] Funding AGI research])
--- Ed Porter <[EMAIL PROTEC
Hi Matt
You call it an AGI proposal but it is described as a distributed search
algorithms that (merely) appears intelligent i.e. "design for an Internet-wide
message posting and search service". There doesn't appear to be any grounding
or semantic interpretation by the AI system? How will it b
should be a
useful service at least in the short term before it destroys us.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Matt Mahoney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 6:17 PM
> To: agi@v2.listbox.com
> Subject: RE: Distributed search (was RE: Hacker intellig
creases your computer's vulnerability, but it
doesn't stop people from using them.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Matt Mahoney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 4:06 PM
> To: agi@v2.listbox.com
> Subject: RE: Distributed search (was RE: Hac
--- William Pearson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 06/12/2007, Ed Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Matt,
> > So if it is perceived as something that increases a machine's
> vulnerability,
> > it seems to me that would be one more reason for people to avoid using it.
> > Ed Porter
>
>
> Wh
It was part of a discussion of using a P2P network with OpenCog to develop
distributed AGI's.
-Original Message-
From: William Pearson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 5:20 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Distributed search (was RE: Hacker intelli
#x27;s vulnerability, but it
doesn't stop people from using them.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Matt Mahoney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 4:06 PM
> To: agi@v2.listbox.com
> Subject: RE: Distributed search (was RE: Hacker intel
On 06/12/2007, Ed Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matt,
> So if it is perceived as something that increases a machine's vulnerability,
> it seems to me that would be one more reason for people to avoid using it.
> Ed Porter
Why are you having this discussion on an AGI list?
Will Pearson
-
gi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: RE: Distributed search (was RE: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re:
[agi] Funding AGI research])
--- Ed Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matt,
>
> Does a PC become more vulnerable to viruses, worms, Trojan horses, root
> kits, and other web attacks
--- Ed Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matt,
>
> Does a PC become more vulnerable to viruses, worms, Trojan horses, root
> kits, and other web attacks if it becomes part of a P2P network? And if so
> why and how much.
It does if the P2P software has vulnerabilities, just like any other ser
PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: RE: Distributed search (was RE: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re:
[agi] Funding AGI research])
--- Ed Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a lot of respect for Google, but I don't like monopolies, whether
it
> is Microsoft or Googl
--- Ed Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a lot of respect for Google, but I don't like monopolies, whether it
> is Microsoft or Google. I think it is vitally important that there be
> several viable search competators.
>
> I wish this wicki one luck. As I said, it sounds a lot like
ssage-
From: Matt Mahoney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 9:24 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Distributed search (was RE: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re:
[agi] Funding AGI research])
--- Ed Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matt,
>
> Pe
--- Ed Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matt,
>
> Perhaps your are right.
>
> But one problem is that big Google-like compuplexes in the next five to ten
> years will be powerful enough to do AGI and they will be much more efficient
> for AGI search because the physical closeness of their
19 matches
Mail list logo
