with my second mail adress that I use). Was the mail sent to the
entire list?
Regards.
/Robert Wensman
2007/6/14, Derek Zahn [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Robert Wensman writes:
Databases:
1. Facts: Contains sensory data records, and actuator records.
2. Theory: Contains memeplexes that tries to model
straightforward. Maybe this
will be easier once we have an example of working AGI.
There is a point though, in that passive AGI systems that just think think
think, but doesnt do anything useful would be of little use :-).
Regards
/Robert Wensman
___
James Ratcliff
their strength in numbers and the hopes for progress it
gives. To me altruistic AGI just seems a lot safer than selfish AGI!
/Robert Wensman
-
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
an increased focus on AGI
would encourage such a development.
/Robert Wensman
These are not clearly separable things. One of the reasons many
people do the system synthesis and balanced approximations so badly
is because they tend to use minor variations of the same function
representations
(off topic, but there are something relevant for AGI)
My fears about economical libertarianism could be illustrated with a fish
pond analogy. If there is a small pond with a large number of small fish of
some predatory species, after an amount of time they will cannibalize and
eat each other
existence on earth that I think many AGI enthusiasts and
futurists wants to deny: What good are wits when you are looking down the
barrel of a gun?
/Robert Wensman
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2
Regarding testing grounds for AGI. Personally I feel that ordinary computer
games could provide an excellent proving ground for the early stages of AGI,
or maybe even better if they are especially constructed. Computer games are
usually especially designed to encourage the player towards
). But please do not say
things like we should write AGI systems that are not programmed. It hurts
my ears/eyes.
/Robert Wensman
2008/1/7, Mike Tintner [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Well we (Penrose co) are all headed in roughly the same direction, but
we're taking different routes.
If you really want
).
You should focus on HOW we could make programs creative, rather loosing
yourself in a strange quest to redefine well established terminology. It is
completley besides the point.
/Robert Wensman
2008/1/7, Mike Tintner [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Robert,
Look, the basic reality is that computers have
. From our
perspective, your position is not revolutionary, just depressing.
/Robert Wensman
2008/1/7, Mike Tintner [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Robert,
Look, the basic reality is that computers have NOT yet been creative in
any significant way, and have NOT yet achieved AGI - general intelligence
at. Why this question? I think Benjamin answered this question
pretty thoroughly already.
/Robert Wensman
-
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=8660244id_secret=82686766-4e2400
1. Brembs and his colleagues reasoned that if fruit flies (Drosophila
melanogaster) *were simply reactive robots entirely determined by their
environment*, in completely featureless rooms they should move completely
randomly.
Yes, but no one has ever argued that a flier is a stateless machine. It
I don't think anyone with knowledge of insect nervous systems would
argue that they're stateless machines. Even simple invertebrates such
as slugs can exhibit classical condition effects which means that at
least some minimal state is retained.
To me the idea of free will suggests that a
the source
of that that information.
/Robert Wensman
-
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=8660244id_secret=91461624-5f7744
into the Novamente system?
/Robert Wensman
---
agi
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription:
http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=95818715-a78a9b
d) you keep repeating the illusion that evolution did NOT achieve the
airplane and other machines - oh yes, it did - your central illusion here
is
that machines are independent species. They're not. They are
EXTENSIONS of
human beings, and don't work without human beings attached.
A few things come to my mind:
1. To what extent is learning and reasoning a sub topic of cognitive
architectures? Is learning and reasoning a plugin to a cognitive
architecture, or is in fact the whole cognitive architecture about learning
and reasoning.
2. I would like a special topic on AGI
Hmm.. well, but at least, using words related to robotics gives a flavour of
embodiment :-).
Anyhow, I still prefer sharing terminology with robotics, as opposed to
narrow AI. Narrow AI and AGI are perhaps closer, so the risk of confusion is
bigger.
/R
2008/3/29, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL
18 matches
Mail list logo
