MP, were you addressing your comment at me, or Alan? If, at me, I could start you off with an IEEE-reviewed document. The exact method in the white paper is one of the many components that has to be programmed.
Please let me know. Rob ________________________________ From: MP via AGI <agi@agi.topicbox.com> Sent: Friday, 08 June 2018 8:34 AM To: AGI Subject: Re: [agi] The four things needed to solve AGI. Alan, would you be interested in emailing me these models? I’m an experienced coder and would love to work on it. mindpixel at proton mail dot com Sent from ProtonMail Mobile On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 1:31 AM, Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via AGI <agi@agi.topicbox.com<mailto:agi@agi.topicbox.com>> wrote: Alan Thank you for your response. I am in no way trying to challenge your personal research, or view. My questions are genuine and AGI related only. I do not agree with the view of some here who defend A.T. Murray's position by saying he at least does something. I agree with your view that it is simply not enough to just make an effort, therefore AGI would result. The true-AGI problem is many-fold more complex than we may even imagine. But all efforts may bring forth new inspiration. When compared to aspects of AGI being produced in robotic form today, I have no idea why Murray et al are trying to reinvent any one of the wheels that are clearly, already turning. It behooves progress to continually refine the real questions to be addressed, as you have obviously done. Perhaps, what would emerge from those efforts would find practical use?However, for its lack of structured debate between simple and complex systems, I would not be able to relate to it. That's my definitive view on Murray's world. I do not program anymore, but I have been designing computational theory for system of systems - to purpose - for a long time. AGI, as a holistic architecture, can be nothing less than a galaxy of deliberate system of systems, administered by at least 1, superpositioned system of systems. I have field tested my theoretical designs against real projects and with real people. The results have been accurate and reliable. The mature models are ready for programming. This is the intelligence (AGI) architecture I am referring to. In my view, it represents as a fully-recursive, adaptive, intelligence architecture (not intelligence bootstrapped), which would go a long way towards enabling AGI functionality, and beyond. Given the appropriate building blocks being put into place to operate within an intelligence architecture (world), the functionality you seek would in theory be able to evolve "naturally". Once programmed into a functional, matured, intelligent system, this may have potential to serve as a future, AGI hub, or docking station. Such is my theory. According to my analysis, a number of the key components of this intelligence architecture have already been programmed by other parties, eg., by CISCO, IBM, MS, GOOGLE, OPENCOG, and so many others in the big-wide world. Such progress serves to inform me that the overall architecture - formulating in my mind - still is on the right track. My passion continues as a hobby. I do it for the fun of it. I'm enjoying the journey. My purpose is not to compete with the efforts of others, but to indulge my life-long fascination and curiosity with the technological challenges presented by AGI, and beyond. In summary, the one thing needed to solve AGI is, in my opinion, still lacking in the public domain. Rob ________________________________ From: Alan Grimes <alonz...@verizon.net> Sent: Friday, 08 June 2018 2:55 AM To: Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via AGI Subject: Re: [agi] The four things needed to solve AGI. Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via AGI wrote: > Alan > > I suppose yo already possess a computational framework to process the > research you are proposing as being critical? In other words, I think > if you do not have the intelligence architecture, none of the > functionality would be agi effective. I'm missing a number of things that limits my ability to do this research myself. -> a GPU programming framework that actually works on my computer, preferably OpenCL for portability reasons... -> a simulation environment... Microsoft Malmo seems pretty close to what I want (bare minimum actually), I'll have to take a look at it again to see if I can make it run the way I need it to. -> Everything is in python these days, so I'll need a high quality manual for the python language. I don't think this documentation actually exists. In fairness, I haven't made a concerted effort to search for it recently. on-line courses in the subject only cover the whitespace-based nesting but basically ignores all other parts of syntax such as data definition and expression syntax. -- Please report bounces from this address to a...@numentics.com Powers are not rights. Artificial General Intelligence List<https://agi.topicbox.com/latest> / AGI / see discussions<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi> + participants<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/members> + delivery options<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups> Permalink<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T507c404b4595c71c-M38117a6369dd3b24722cb3c1> ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T507c404b4595c71c-M1481899e6548ac6177abb850 Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups
