You make a very good point BUT human intelligence doesn't come from the 6
billion individuals there are currently living on Earth or from the dead humans
of the past. Most humans don't contribute very much to the collective
knowledge of mankind. The number of contributing humans could be as
fact.
Your conclusions about concept of self and unemboodied agent means
ungrounded symbols are also not shared by me and not explained or proven by
you.
Your saying something is doesn't necessarily make it true.
-- David Clark
- Original Message -
From: Terren Suydam [EMAIL PROTECTED
that relate directly to the real world and reality, then why couldn't
an AI use this model to manipulate things in the real world. The grounding
doesn't have to be created by the AGI UNLESS the model is created or emerges
from the AGI itself.
-- David Clark
-Original Message-
From
agree with you but I
just don't know if you are right or wrong.
There are many very smart people on this list and if posts were usually
posted to be helpful, rather than for other reasons, the dialogue would be
much better.
David Clark
PS Richard, you are not the worse person for talking down
I apologize for breaking the killthread on my last 2 posts.
Since I have never seen one before on the AGI list, I didn't skim my emails
before commenting.
David Clark
---
agi
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: https
for quite a while now and the snipers have been snoozing for just
as long so I am referring to when the SL4 list had 50 plus emails a day)
I would rather delete the posts I don't find interesting than be snipped, as
many posts used to be on SL4.
-- David Clark
-Original Message-
From
necessary.
Even though I agree that generalizing is a very desirable quality for an
AGI, is this property necessary to creating an AGI? Most people don't
generalize all that well in my opinion.
David Clark
-Original Message-
From: William Pearson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: March-03
cheating.
Ask the question simply:
Do the people on this list think that training is necessary for the creation
of an AGI and would they call training the AGI cheating?
You say training means cheating and to create an AGI you can't do that. I
disagree.
David Clark
-Original Message-
From
to at least get close to human level intelligence.
Is a blind man who is also a paraplegic necessarily considered less
intelligent than an able bodied person?
David Clark
From: Bob Mottram [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: March-04-08 8:58 AM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: [agi] would anyone
the help of other humans, why should
this is a criteria for AGI?
David Clark
PS I am not suggesting that explicitly programming 100% of an AGI is either
doable or desirable but some degree of detailed teaching must be a
requirement for all on this list who dream of creating an AGI, no?
-Original
around in the world and getting
firsthand knowledge from a person's senses isn't a 100% prerequisite for
intelligence.
I would appreciate more comments on how to achieve an AGI and less on
whether a AGI on computers using software is possible or not.
David Clark
-Original Message-
From: Pei
translation doesn't
necessarily need to come first!
Even with a good connection to the real world, I find it hard to believe
that the relationships between things in the real world (the models) will be
divinable any time soon.
David Clark
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org
I just ordered your book so I think I'll wait and read it all.
David Clark
- Original Message -
From: J Storrs Hall, PhD [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 7:21 AM
Subject: [agi] Beyond AI chapters up on Kurzweil
Ray Kurzweil has arranged to put
experience on the part of Matt IMHO.
David Clark
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=231415user_secret=fabd7936
Math and most code has to do with Computer Science techniques not Math.
Some people view all computer code as a kind of Math but I don't see giving
Math such a broad definition very useful.
I didn't say Math was useless for AGI, just not a relevant as other Computer
Science techniques.
David
disagree with your narrow usage
of model and simulate.
David Clark
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=231415user_secret=fabd7936
is that I am meticulously
consistent in the conclusions I draw based on the information I have. This
knowledge of what I know and how I think is not probabilistic or
approximate. It is totally deterministic and intentional regardless of the
inherent non-determinism of my human brain.
David Clark
is infinite. A computer CAN model/simulate
anything including itself (whatever that means) given enough time. If the
model has understanding (formulas or algorithms) then any amount of
simulated detail can be realized.
David Clark
- Original Message -
From: Matt Mahoney [EMAIL PROTECTED
that would be required in the short term to get an AGI to be as
proficient as you wish in compression, would be the best use of it's
relatively scarce resources?
-- David Clark
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go
. BTW why can't an AGI communicate in a subset of
English to start and grow the number and complexity of it's vocabulary over
time? If a subset of English is initially used, why does this imply
*restrict* as you mentioned above? Children don't start off with adult
level language either!
-- David
about Java versus Lojban. Although they are both
syntactically un-ambiguous, they were designed for totally different
purposes and Java, in no way, could be used as a NL of any kind.
-- David Clark
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your
are not reciprocal concepts. If humans had unlimited storage
and compression of information wasn't necessary, wouldn't the humans
*understanding* still confer intelligence to that human?
-- David Clark
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options
intelligence!
-- David Clark
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303
the drawbacks you mention.
-- David Clark
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303
options to
create solutions than one that doesn't.
Having the ability to modify code at the lower or higher meta levels doesn't
mean that it has to.
-- David Clark
- Original Message -
From: Pei Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 6:35 AM
Subject: Re
an AGI and what exists in our brains.
-- David Clark
- Original Message -
From: Jean-Paul Van Belle
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 8:24 AM
Subject: Re: [agi] small code small hardware
True - many definitions of modules ;-)
My definition: unique
- Original Message -
From: Eugen Leitl [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 8:55 AM
Subject: Re: [agi] small code small hardware
On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 08:40:02AM -0700, David Clark wrote:
I would like to know what computer executes data
, you will always have more flexibility than if this
option wasn't open to you at all.
If you disagree, please explain why. It seems quite obvious to me and if I
am mistaken, I would appreciate the reasons so I can adjust my thinking.
-- David Clark
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http
a great deal.
-- David Clark
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303
15 points was for a language for AGI, not
just any general purpose language. My intentions at least, were to elicit
some constructive comments that might help me in my last few months of it's
development. I never meant to cause a language flame war or to bore anyone
to death.
-- David Clark
that my code turned out better than I tried to
code. Never. I don't *believe* anything without evidence or the reasonable
likelihood that there is evidence.
-- David Clark
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http
a clue about what they are trying to build, and why.
Are you the only person on this list with a clue?
-- David Clark
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303
or reasonable?
-- David Clark
- Original Message -
From: Samantha Atknis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 11:29 PM
Subject: Re: [agi] My proposal for an AGI agenda
David Clark wrote:
I appreciate the amount of effort you made in replying to my email
between different domains even if quite different algorithms were
used to create the patterns.
-- David Clark
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303
and manipulated in context so no normal dictionary would be of
much good. It would just be words without meaning.
-- David Clark
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303
. Allocating memory is just
not the programmers business in my language.
-- David Clark
- Original Message -
From: Tony Lofthouse [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2007 7:54 AM
Subject: RE: [agi] My proposal for an AGI agenda
David Clarke wrote:
I have 18 points
and so I
have added this to my language.
Sorry, LISP or any kind of LISP just won't do.
-- David Clark
- Original Message -
From: Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2007 8:03 AM
Subject: Re: [agi] My proposal for an AGI agenda
Allegro LISP
etc is very useful to me but I don't pretend that the
purpose of my language is as general as or can be used in as many normal
programming tasks, as these languages can.
-- David Clark
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please
if necessary.
In
practice this is rarely used and needs to be explicitly declared.
This is definitely an improvement on C++.
-- David Clark
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member
, higher
level functional or other languages can easily be made and then compiled
into the native language for huge cycle savings. This can't be said for all
the languages I have looked at so far.
If you care to comment on any of my points directly, I would more than happy
to respond.
-- David Clark
can't think of any!
-- David Clark
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303
/aihal.htm
-- David Clark
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303
my system is
not appropriate but I think AGI isn't one of them.
-- David Clark
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303
automatically?
15. central structure ?
distributed control?
Who on this list would abdicate their autonomy to one centralized authority?
If not distributed then not at all.
-- David Clark
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options
- Original Message -
From: Shane Legg
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 10:34 AM
Subject: Re: [agi] My proposal for an AGI agenda
On 3/23/07, David Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a Math minor from University but in 32 years of computer work, I
really understand what you were looking at all.
What exact examples do you disagree with? Do you think the examples I took
verbatim from the official Lisp web site were made up? Do YOU understand or do
you just know the code words?
-- David Clark
- Original Message -
From
representing 100M of data in 1 second where the data is stored on the
disk (it would be faster if only in memory). I have had 2.5K programs
running at the same time and created tables of over 2M records. I have
created arrays up to 10M elements. (size is limited to memory space)
-- David Clark
create small efficient programs
automatically for *some* problems would be very useful even if it couldn't
generate them for any given task.
-- David Clark
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com
In my previous email, I mistakenly edited out the part from Yan King Yin and
it looks like the We know that logic is easy was attributed to him when it
was actually a quote of Eugen Leitl.
Sorry for my mistake.
-- David Clark
- Original Message -
From: David Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED
for the past 2 years.
You have a lot of nerve, indeed. I made a number of arguments in my email
about your conclusions (supported I might add by no arguments) and you
respond by pointing me to how to post email URL's. Your arrogance surely
exceeds your intelligence.
-- David Clark
development.
When this project goes ahead, I think even Ben (who has a huge intellectual and
financial investment in his Novamente project) will be interested in the
experiments and results a system like I am proposing will have, even if he
never interfaces his program with it.
-- David Clark
to switch. Just you having a
small interest in the outcome of this project as it goes forward would be
great for me.
-- David Clark
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303
the programmer from doing any coding at all. Hopefully
by then, the AGI will be able to program itself with much higher accuracy
and speed than any human could. The goal of most human coding in my vision
of an AGI is to create programs that generate programs.
-- David Clark
-
This list is sponsored
or suggestions you may volunteer.
-- David Clark
- Original Message -
From: Peter Voss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 3:40 PM
Subject: RE: [agi] My proposal for an AGI agenda
Yes, David, some good ideas.
We are well into our AGI prototype using c
interfaces will be the most useful
way of pursuing AGI.
Thank you for your comments.
-- David Clark
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303
compete to create an AGI. I can't see how I
could agree both approaches are viable when my suggestions can include all of
yours but not vise versa. I could agree that we just disagree however ;)
-- David Clark
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe
levels it could be a matrix of numbers or
Command parameter like I described above.
-- David Clark
- Original Message -
From: Eric Baum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 5:42 AM
Subject: Re: [agi] Logical representation
(2) In any language, the words
an AI system consisting of many modules has to have one canonical format for
representing content WHY?
In a modern operating system that consists of a huge number of component parts,
there is no one data representation. There must be a consistent interface
between the modules for them to work
- Original Message -
From: Russell Wallace
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 1:33 PM
Subject: Re: [agi] Logical representation
On 3/14/07, David Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
an AI system consisting of many modules has to have one canonical
each module can be it's own
expert. Wouldn't such a system make a lot more sense then always trying to
fit a square peg into a round hole?
-- David Clark
- Original Message -
From: Russell Wallace
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 1:33 PM
Subject: Re
.
Optimization on DB's is done at a higher level than an index in any case.
David Clark
- Original Message -
From: Mark Waser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 6:59 AM
Subject: Re: [agi] Development Environments for AI (a few non-religious
comments
of
data from disk, no AGI is going to be built using conventional computers any
time soon.
David Clark
- Original Message -
From: Mark Waser
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 9:36 AM
Subject: Re: [agi] Development Environments for AI (a few non-religious
the
flames!
David Clark
PS Would you call millions of records and hundreds of gigs of disk space
small? How about looking for a random string in 16,000 emails (over 100 meg
of emails) in 1 second. Slow?
- Original Message -
From: Mark Waser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent
the appropriate conclusions when we need them because we understand how it
actually works?
David Clark
- Original Message -
From: Charles D Hixson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 11:02 AM
Subject: Re: [agi] Project proposal: MindPixel 2
David Clark
the human and the new language for no
net benefit.
David Clark
- Original Message -
From: Benjamin Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 1:28 PM
Subject: Re: [agi] Project proposal: MindPixel 2
YKY, this kind of thing has been tried many
N projects that have not produced any intelligence but we
know that basically human intelligence is based on NN's. If there is a
simple message in these facts I fail to see it, other than that no approach
should be fully discounted until somebody actually succeeds at building an
AGI.
David Clark
--
ta and set of algorithms that humans do?
I am having a hard time seeing where such wild and
unsupported statements benefit others?
David Clark
- Original Message -
From:
Matt
Mahoney
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 1:21
PM
Subject: Re: [agi]
your bet *that* stock will behave
rationally.
Programs to predict stock prices are all over the place and their presence
only makes the market include that fact in it's current price. Playing the
stock market by an AGI will not be the way to fund more research IMHO.
-- David Clark
68 matches
Mail list logo
