In AGI I think there are roughly two classes: obscure, lone inventors and established researchers (university appointments and/or large scale projects).
Other labels are professional or amateur. I think that it can at least be said that there is a serious question as far as what constitutes an authority in AGI IF WE USE THE CRITERIA OF WORKING STRONG AI. There is also the issue of hype... I read the news several days a week and it's common to hear claims of fashionable paradigms "understanding" images and so forth. It is common to hear claims, eg., Watson "understands" such and such. Then there are claims like "passing the Turing test in a limited way" (which ~ "narrow AI") and the suggestion that full blown strong AI is imminent (usually in "ten years"). So, my point here is that it is often tough to discern what is actually happening in some research project (particularly how well it scales up to real work, general problems), to resist the temptation to apply labels (obscure lone researcher or established academic, pro or amateur), to see through hype if at all possible.... there is a lot of it... and I'm not trying to detract from anybody's work here, just making some observations. there are a lot of worthy efforts going on I respect! On 12/17/13, Steve Richfield <[email protected]> wrote: > Russell, > > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Russell Wallace > <[email protected] >> wrote: > >> Okay, so would it be accurate to paraphrase you as suggesting an AGI MVP >> should look like a big linear algebra solver? >> > > More like - lots of little semi-linear algebra solvers, with appropriate > "glue" of unknown sorts. > > That's an interesting idea if so, and possibly a promising one. The main >> concern I'd have would be to make sure there's enough of a market for it, >> i.e. enough problems people care about, that are naturally expressed in >> that sort of form. >> > > You question the market for AGIs? Heresy!!! > > No, I don't think that there is a market, or even that building AGIs might > be a good idea. However, some of these "elements" might drop into various > applications and greatly extend their capability. > > Steve > ============== > >> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 6:24 PM, Steve Richfield < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Russell, >>> >>> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 3:21 AM, Russell Wallace < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> If you are trying to design an AGI, what is your design going to be a >>>> big version of? >>>> >>> >>> Re-mentioning something from the past, but with new emphasis... >>> >>> When I was ~15 I discovered numerical series and their ability to >>> predict >>> future elements, which it appeared to me at that time to be what math >>> was >>> all about. I set about creating formulas that in effect merged several >>> different series together and predicted future elements, in the >>> sophomoric >>> hope that the world was a LOT better organized than it is. This also >>> paralleled an "intelligence" test that I had taken, which consisted of >>> lists of numbers and the problem of guessing the next number. It looked >>> to >>> me at that time like "simple" (page-long) formulas might actually be >>> judged as being "intelligent"!!! My effort failed for several reasons, >>> some >>> of which may be repairable, but the dream continues - with AGI being >>> perhaps the ultimate extension. >>> >>> My primary discovery in this early failed effort was that linear algebra >>> could in effect make decisions, and make "proportional decisions" akin >>> to >>> Bayesian math WITHOUT resorting to ANY conditional methodology!!! >>> >>> Of course, my early effort was only one-dimensional - lists of numbers >>> as >>> input, with the problem being to predict the next. However, I don't see >>> any >>> fundamental reason why the concept couldn't be extended to any number of >>> dimensions. >>> >>> Imagine a system of elements (perhaps like biological neurons, but NOT >>> like people now think biological neurons work) with the capability of >>> predicting their inputs into the future (with obvious uncertainties and >>> errors) via substantially linear, or at least continuous means. Some >>> inputs >>> would be "free" and reflect our intentions. Solving problems would >>> consist >>> of manipulating the free inputs until a desired result was achieved, >>> perhaps using methods akin to genetic algorithms. >>> >>> In short, maybe our present "elements" of neurons, Bayesian logic, etc., >>> are just too damn simple for the task at hand. >>> >>> OK, I have proposed above one prospective class of super-elements. Does >>> anyone here have ideas for other super-elements? >>> >>> Steve >>> ======================= >>> >>>> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 9:48 AM, Steve Richfield < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> WAY back in the 1960s, a friend of mine, Carl Nicolai, now only known >>>>> as the inventor of non-deterministic crypto, was promoting the use of >>>>> pseudo-random carrier waves for spread spectrum communication - to go >>>>> MUCH >>>>> farther with less power. As his ideas started to catch on, one UCSF EE >>>>> professor even put up a web site to debunk such craziness!!! >>>>> >>>>> Carl was SO disconnected from the mainstream that he couldn't get his >>>>> articles published, and his patent promptly received a Secrecy Order. >>>>> >>>>> Of course, Carl's thoughts are now accepted as routine communications >>>>> methods. >>>>> >>>>> Now, AGI seems to be caught in a similar sort of "trap" as RF >>>>> communications once was, where present dogma and "leaders" are leading >>>>> it >>>>> to a dead end. >>>>> >>>>> Organizationally, AGI appears to be on a suicide mission, thinking it >>>>> to be SO well targeted that it can enjoy the luxury of dismissing >>>>> articles >>>>> about radically different approaches as being "off topic" for >>>>> conference >>>>> presentations. Guys like Carl would NEVER have been acceptable to any >>>>> conference. >>>>> >>>>> I think we have all hoped that guys like Jim and Tintner would see >>>>> where the King has put his clothes. when we can all see quite clearly >>>>> that >>>>> the King is wearing them. This has led to an insane level of >>>>> tolerance, >>>>> because we all know that all it may take is one CAREFULLY calculated >>>>> question to blow AGI wide open. Yet - apparently, the question remains >>>>> unasked. >>>>> >>>>> For example, maybe we just haven't figured out yet where in an AGI to >>>>> put the random number generator? We know that we NEED randomness in >>>>> game >>>>> theory and genetic algorithms, so I doubt that an AGI could be guilt >>>>> without using a random number generator. >>>>> >>>>> OK, half a decade of discussions has failed to find the Holy Grail of >>>>> AGI. Now, how about taking a step back and working on some good >>>>> QUESTIONS? >>>>> >>>>> Any thoughts? >>>>> >>>>> Steve >>>>> >>>>> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >>>>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/1658954-f53d1a3f> | >>>>> Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription >>>>> <http://www.listbox.com> >>>>> >>>> >>>> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >>>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/10443978-6f4c28ac> | >>>> Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription >>>> <http://www.listbox.com> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Full employment can be had with the stoke of a pen. Simply institute a >>> six hour workday. That will easily create enough new jobs to bring back >>> full employment. >>> >>> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/1658954-f53d1a3f> | >>> Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription >>> <http://www.listbox.com> >>> >> >> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/10443978-6f4c28ac> | >> Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription >> <http://www.listbox.com> >> > > > > -- > Full employment can be had with the stoke of a pen. Simply institute a six > hour workday. That will easily create enough new jobs to bring back full > employment. > > > > ------------------------------------------- > AGI > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/11943661-d9279dae > Modify Your Subscription: > https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > ------------------------------------------- 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
