Excellent point about questions.
The question is the key to all of this, not knowledge or intelligence.
Will these machines answer questions about existing knowledge or about
knowledge that does not yet exist?
Answering questions about existing knowledge is a search algorithm and
enables learning. Automation of logic, e.g., can make this more powerful
and make existing knowledge more accessible and usable, but it's still a
search for some knowledge that already exists.
Answering questions about knowledge that does not yet exist is knowledge
creation and this is the process behind ALL social advance. Absolutely
nothing intellectual advances without it. And there will be no singularity
without understanding it. In fact, this understanding will be singularity.
When we create knowledge today it occurs unconsciously or by accident. Most
people spend their lives playing in a circular field of 'experts,' bantering
about existing knowledge, which is often a huge waste of time and effort in
terms of social advance.
All of you just ask yourselves when you last created new knowledge. Not
learned it, or read it, or argued it, or compiled it, or shared it, etc.,
but created it. What was it? How did you do it? Where did it come from?
Where did it go? And if, by chance, you're not personally aware of when
you did it, how could you possibly build a machine that is capable of doing
it?
Without KC, you're looking at something to make existing knoweldge more
accessible, or interpretable, or practical/applicable, or learnable, etc.,
and you're leaving the rest up to the humans that by chance stumble upon
this one process that moves everything intellectual forward. At best,
building a helper of stumbling humans.
Kind Regards,
Bruce LaDuke
Managing Director
Instant Innovation, LLC
Indianapolis, IN
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.hyperadvance.com
----Original Message Follows----
From: "deering" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [singularity] Scenarios for a simulated universe
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 16:57:55 -0600
Russell Wallace writes: "What programs of the "please run this on an
infinite computer" type (AIXI, Blockhead, a bunch of others with acronyms
and cutesy names that I don't remember) actually amount to is "suppose I am
Jehovah, then I will create all possible universes [or all universes of a
certain type] and select the ones with relevant properties". (Which is
mathematically consistent though of no practical relevance seeing as one is
not actually Jehovah.) "
It should be a fairly obvious implementation of a nested quantum computer to
run any of these infinite processing programs. We will soon have oracle
type computers that can answer any question with the reservation that the
top level of the nest will have to be large enough to hold both the question
and the answer. Current quantum computers are at the 3 or 4 bit level but
scientists are confident of exponential advancement in future development.
Of course then the problem will be, "Are you smart enough to understand the
answer?"
Mike Deering,
General Editor, http://nano-catalog.com/
Director, Singularity Action Group
http://home.mchsi.com/~deering9/index.html
Email: deering9 at mchsi dot com
-----
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=11983
_________________________________________________________________
Don’t miss your chance to WIN 10 hours of private jet travel from Microsoft®
Office Live http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/mcrssaub0540002499mrt/direct/01/
-----
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=11983
