On 10 Feb 05 Steve Reed said:
In 2014, according to trend, the semiconductor manufacturers may reach
the 16 nanometer lithography node, with 32 CPU cores per chip, perhaps
150+ times more capable than today's x86 chip.
I raised this issue with a colleague who said that he wondered whether
On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 10:04:25PM +1100, Philip Sutton wrote:
I raised this issue with a colleague who said that he wondered whether this
extrapolation would work because of the dynamics of economic cost. He
There are several developments which will terminate Moore in semiconductor
On Thu, Feb 10, 2005 at 04:58:51PM -0500, Ben Goertzel wrote:
Hmmm... IMO, there is a damn big leap between bugs and humans!!!
Sure, but the leap between nothing at all and bugs is far greater still.
As another example, the step from a mouse to a man in terms of added
functionality at the
Clearly from here to a simulated bug is a big leap, but the
leap from a sim
bug to a sim human is ALSO really big, no?
Yes, but we have a map: input from wet and computational neuroscience.
Working blueprints are crawling, flying and walking everywhere.
I realize it's the wrong approach
On Fri, 11 Feb 2005, Eugen Leitl wrote:
Just want to be clear Eugen, when you talk about evolutionary simulations,
you are talking about simulating the physical world, down to a
cellular and perhaps even molecular level?
-B
---
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate
On Fri, Feb 11, 2005 at 10:03:33AM -0500, Brad Wyble wrote:
Just want to be clear Eugen, when you talk about evolutionary simulations,
you are talking about simulating the physical world, down to a
cellular and perhaps even molecular level?
Whole critters? Heavensforbid.
Fake physics not
On Wed, Feb 09, 2005 at 07:15:51PM -0500, Brad Wyble wrote:
Hardware advancements are necessary, but I think you guys spend alot of
time chasing white elephants. AGI's are not going to magically appear
just because hardware gets fast enough to run them, a myth that is
strongly implied by
On Wed, 9 Feb 2005, Martin Striz wrote:
--- Brad Wyble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hardware advancements are necessary, but I think you guys spend alot of
time chasing white elephants. AGI's are not going to magically appear
just because hardware gets fast enough to run them, a myth that is
strongly
There are several major stepping stones with hardware speed. One, is when you
have
enough for a nontrivial AI (price tag can be quite astronomic). Second,
enough in an *affordable* installation. Third, enough crunch to map the
parameter space/design by evolutionary algorithms. Fourth, the
On Thu, Feb 10, 2005 at 04:46:39AM -0500, Brad Wyble wrote:
No never. Evolution in silico will never move faster than real matter
interacting.
Where are you taking this strong certainty? I can easily make a superrealtime
Newtonian physics simulator by spatial tesselation over a large number
The brain is thoroughly riddled with such control architechture, starting
at the retina and moving back, it's a constant process of throwing out
information and compressing what's left into a more compact form. That's
really all your brain is doing from the moment a photon hits your eye,
--- Brad Wyble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 9 Feb 2005, Martin Striz wrote:
--- Brad Wyble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hardware advancements are necessary, but I think you guys spend alot of
time chasing white elephants. AGI's are not going to magically appear
just because
I'd like to start off by saying that I have officially made the transition
into old crank. It's a shame it's happened so early in my life, but it
had to happen sometime. So take my comments in that context. If I've
ever had a defined role on this list, it's in trying to keep the pies from
On Thu, Feb 10, 2005 at 08:42:59AM -0500, Brad Wyble wrote:
I don't think you and I will ever see eye to eye here, because we have
different conceptions in our heads of how big this parameter space is.
It depends on the system. The one I talked about (automata networks) is not
very large.
On Thu, Feb 10, 2005 at 10:15:25AM -0500, Brad Wyble wrote:
Evolution is limited by mutation rates and generation times. Mammals
need from 1 to 15 years before they reach reproductive age. Generation
That time is not useless or wasted. Their brains are acquiring
information, molding
--- Brad Wyble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Evolution is limited by mutation rates and generation times. Mammals
need from 1 to 15 years before they reach reproductive age. Generation
That time is not useless or wasted. Their brains are acquiring
information, molding themselves. I
, but level off as the
known knowledge gets aborbed by any given configuration.
Comments?
Dan Goe
- Original Message -
From: Brad Wyble [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2005 10:15 AM
Subject: Re: [agi] Cell
I'd like to start off by saying that I have
--- Brad Wyble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Evolution is limited by mutation rates and generation times. Mammals
need from 1 to 15 years before they reach reproductive age. Generation
That time is not useless or wasted. Their brains are acquiring
information, molding themselves. I
On Thu, Feb 10, 2005 at 12:07:57PM -0500, Brad Wyble wrote:
You guys are throwing around orders of magnitude like ping pong balls
based on very little practical evidence. Sometimes no estimate is less
misleading than one that is arbitrary.
What makes you think it's arbitrary? Minimal
I'm confused, all you want are Ants?
Or did you mean AGI in ant-bodies?
Social insects are a good model, actually. Yes, all I want is a framework
flexible and efficient enough to produce social insect level on intelligence
on hardware of the next decades.
If you can come that far, the rest is
Social insects are a good model, actually. Yes, all I want is a
framework
flexible and efficient enough to produce social insect level on
intelligence
on hardware of the next decades.
If you can come that far, the rest is relatively trivial,
especially if you
have continous
On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 08:26:02AM -0600, Stephen Reed wrote:
The published hardware description of the Cell SPUs: 128 bit vector
engines, 128 registers each, matches the published Freescale AltiVec
processor architecture. I've looked over the programmer's documentation
It's eight 4x32
On Wed, 9 Feb 2005, Eugen Leitl wrote:
What I don't like about Cell is lack of 8 bit and 16 bit integer data types
in SPU SIMD. I'm also missing discussion on whether the SPUs are connected by
a crossbar (there might be no need for it, if the internal bus is really fast
and wide), and which
On Wed, 9 Feb 2005, Stephen Reed wrote:
On Wed, 9 Feb 2005, Eugen Leitl wrote:
What I don't like about Cell is lack of 8 bit and 16 bit integer data types
in SPU SIMD. I'm also missing discussion on whether the SPUs are connected
by
a crossbar (there might be no need for it, if the
I guess one problem (I'm doing neural network stuff) is
whether the *main* memory access rate can be increased
by using the Cell. If each subprocessor can access the
main memory independently that'd be a huge performance
boost.
The 256K local memory is not entirely ideal because,
like the brain,
On Wed, Feb 09, 2005 at 11:13:18PM +0800, Yan King Yin wrote:
I guess one problem (I'm doing neural network stuff) is
whether the *main* memory access rate can be increased
by using the Cell. If each subprocessor can access the
main memory independently that'd be a huge performance
boost.
Hardware advancements are necessary, but I think you guys spend alot of
time chasing white elephants. AGI's are not going to magically appear
just because hardware gets fast enough to run them, a myth that is
strongly implied by some of the singularity sites I've read.
The hardware is a moot
--- Brad Wyble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hardware advancements are necessary, but I think you guys spend alot of
time chasing white elephants. AGI's are not going to magically appear
just because hardware gets fast enough to run them, a myth that is
strongly implied by some of the
The published hardware description of the Cell SPUs: 128 bit vector
engines, 128 registers each, matches the published Freescale AltiVec
processor architecture. I've looked over the programmer's documentation
for that processor and believe that vector processing is of limited
usefulness for
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Stephen Reed
Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 9:26 AM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: [agi] Cell
The published hardware description of the Cell SPUs: 128 bit vector
engines, 128 registers each, matches the published
30 matches
Mail list logo
