> -----Original Message----- > From: Matt Mahoney [mailto:[email protected]] > > That is an interesting parallel to AGI. Not just because the payoff is so huge, > but also because (I believe) the level of difficulty is about the same. >
OK. We are all cooking in the same stew, getting older, having aging issues and will die usually < 100 years of age. At the same time 1 isolated human is not really a GI. If you grow 1 human in a white room from conception without any interaction from any trace of human species involvement you're not going to get much intelligence from that. We are/have been a collective intelligence. Creating an AGI REQUIRES human collective intelligence but AGI likely will be immortal since it is software and can copy and refactor/rewrite. So, in creating a running AGI, the technology and mathematical formulas should contain the same code to transcend a single human GI spliced off of the human collective GI for continuous life extension. The simple alternative is that once AGI is created it'll figure out the life extension issues for us. But that's after the fact. We'll most likely be dead by then and cryogenics is the closest physical hope for any long term life extension. John ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
