I'm still relatively new to the field so of course i do not put a lot of
strength behind my opinions. I think there are some clarifications here that
could be useful, although it is highly improbable that you need them.
My overall argument is completely vindicated by what you say here.
(My
Ben Goertzel wrote:
Sorry, but I simply do not accept that you can make do really well on
a long series of IQ tests into a computable function without getting
tangled up in an implicit homuncular trap (i.e. accidentally assuming
some real intelligence in the computable function).
Let me
Ben Goertzel wrote:
I agree that, to compare humans versus AIXI on an IQ test in a fully
fair way (that tests only intelligence rather than prior knowledge)
would be hard, because there is no easy way to supply AIXI with the same
initial knowledge state that the human has.
Regarding whether
Alas, that was not quite the question at issue...
In the proof of AIXI's ability to solve the IQ test, is AIXI *allowed*
to go so far as to simulate most of the functionality of a human brain
in order to acquire its ability?
I am not asking you to make a judgment call on whether or not it
Ben Goertzel wrote:
Alas, that was not quite the question at issue...
In the proof of AIXI's ability to solve the IQ test, is AIXI *allowed*
to go so far as to simulate most of the functionality of a human brain
in order to acquire its ability?
I am not asking you to make a judgment call
AIXI is valueless.
Well, I agree that AIXI provides zero useful practical guidance to those
of us
working on practical AGI systems.
However, as I clarified in a prior longer post, saying that mathematics
is valueless
is always a risky proposition. Statements of this nature have been
On 3/8/07, Richard Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let me put it this way: would AIXI, in building an implementation of
this function, have to make use of a universe (or universe simulation)
that *implicitly* included intelligences that were capable of creating
the IQ tests?
So, if there
On 3/8/07, Peter Voss [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's about time that some else said that the AIXI emperor has no clothes.
Infinite computing power arguments prove **nothing**.
That depends on exactly what you mean by prove nothing.
For example, you can use the AIXI model to prove that no
On 3/8/07, Peter Voss [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
AIXI certainly doesn't prove that AGI is possible.
I agree.
The human brain is what makes me think that it's possible.
Shane
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
