Re: [agi] G0 theory completed

2006-10-10 Thread David Clark
You misinterpret my response. I never said I didn't understand the 30,000 line program. I said I can't think about the details embodied by the code at the same time. These are quite different things. If remembering huge numbers of details at one time is your definition of understanding then

Re: [agi] G0 theory completed

2006-10-10 Thread Matt Mahoney
Do you really write 30,000 line programs without writing any error handling code?My argument for the unpredictability of AGI is based on Legg's paper [1]. It proves that a Turing machine cannot predict another machine with greater Kolmogorov complexity.Here I am equating Kolmogorov complexity with

Re: [agi] G0 theory completed

2006-10-10 Thread Starglider
On 10 Oct 2006 at 11:23, Matt Mahoney wrote: My argument for the unpredictability of AGI is based on Legg's paper [1]. It proves that a Turing machine cannot predict another machine with greater Kolmogorov complexity. Firstly, this is for the case of a stand-alone program attempting to

Re: [agi] G0 theory completed

2006-10-10 Thread Ben Goertzel
Hi, My concern about G0 is that the problem of integrating first order logic or structured symbolic knowledge with language and sensory/motor data is unsolved, even when augmented with weighted connections to represent probability and/or confidence (e.g. fuzzy logic, Bayesian systems,