John -
Thanks for a refreshingly new discussion for this forum. Just as you
describe, it is quite interesting to see how seemingly disparate tracks
can be combined and guided onto the same course. Accordingly, your
presentation has brought to mind similar notions that appear to fit
somewhere in your efforts. So, here are two questions for you:
1. Where do you lean regarding the measure of intelligence? - more
towards that of Hutter (the ability to predict the future) or towards
Winser-Gross/Freer (causal entropy - soft of a proxy for future
opportunities; ref
https://www.alexwg.org/publications/PhysRevLett_110-168702.pdf)
2. Do you agree with Tegmark's position regarding consciousness? Namely,
"Consciousness might feel so non-physical because it is doubly substrate
independent:
* Any chunk of matter can be the substrate for memory as long as it has
many different stable states;
* Any matter can be computronium, the substrate for computation, as long
as it contains certain universal building blocks that can be combined to
implement any function. NAND gates and neurons are two important
examples of such universal “computational atoms.”.
If consciousness is the way information feels when being processed in
certain complex ways, then it's merely the /structure of the information
processing that matters, not the structure of the matter doing the
information processing. //A wave can travel across the lake, even though
none of its water molecules do. I//t's not the particles but the pattern
that really matters./
(A Tegmark cliff notes version of can be found here:
https://quevidaesta2010.blogspot.com/2017/10/life-30-max-tegmark.html)
On 09/09/2018 09:07 PM, johnr...@polyplexic.com wrote:
Basically, if you look at all of life (Earth only for this example)
over the past 4.5 billion years, including all the consciousness and
all that “presumed” entanglement and say that's the first general
intelligence (GI) the algebraic structural dynamics on the
computational edge... is computing consciousness and is correlated
directly to general intelligence. They are two versions of the same thing.
So to ask why basic AI is only computational consciousness not really
consciousness computation is left up the reader as an exercise :)
To clarify, my poor grammatical skills –
AI = computational consciousness = consciousness performing computation
GI = consciousness computation= consciousness being created by computation
The original key idea here though is consciousness as Universal
Communications Protocol. Took me years to tie those two together.
That's a very practical idea, the stuff above I'm not sure of just
toying with...
John
*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/agi/subscription> Permalink
<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T9c94dabb0436859d-Mcf324d011886fce24bc9a48c>
------------------------------------------
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink:
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T9c94dabb0436859d-M7881cfcebbafeb5d0ec42239
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
