On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 11:54 AM, John Rose <[email protected]> wrote:

> AGI needs to keep in touch with a consensus reality



I very much doubt it, I think it is enough for AGI to "prove" it can
develop increasingly better views of its reality, at its own pace, if an
AGI passed the Turing test taking an hour for each of its answers I'd be OK
with that. Also, taking a clue from biology, we do seem to have the fast
and the slow nervous system as well as engineering solutions like the
retina and optic nerve being "glued" on the brain rather than the ankles,
in no way pretending to do reality acquisition, rather defining "real time"
by their own working tempo, anywhere from 20 to 100 fps. Perhaps the brain
can do some reading at 10 and 20 fps but none at 100fps, and that's that,
there seems to be no cache that, after closing one's eyes, allows the
processing of a backlog. But we do have a backlog mechanism when it comes
to General Intelligence, we can close our eyes and work through a problem
domain for seconds, minutes or even longer, with no real-time constraints
really.

Now, the "social" aspect of intelligence is very important, and it is great
that we could both in a split second agree about the contents in a room,
while even 10 years in a room would not be enough to agree on Palestine or
the Greek debt. For real-world mixed man-machine applications it would be
important to achieve human-time performance, but not "of the kind" that
would look like a physics simulation forcing us to tackle some
analog-to-digital issues in the sense of the article you are quoted. For
what it's worth I believe that very sparse and cruel representations will
suffice or even are necessary. I am also convinced that "multiresolution"
representations will have to be included in any design, analogous to our
short and long term memory - I am just a bit skeptical of trying to
"program in" our mind models, for example limiting the artificial short
term memory to 7 items.

All of the above applies to a kind of "finished product". But during the
design and evolution of an AGI I have stated elsewhere that indeed one
could ride the real-time horse, emphasizing the responsiveness of the
machine. One could, for example, explore the capabilities of one of these
enormous CUDA cards or FPGAs, acknowledging that you could never respond
faster than so many nanoseconds (FPGAs being much slower). Then again, the
optimal "system dimensioning" is the one that includes your sensors and
actuators, if you can only send commands to your motor 10 times a second,
then why would you read your body temperature 100 times a second and
analyze your state 1000 times a second, you are better off running the
analysis a split second before sending it to the actuator and use 99% of
your "horsepower" for something else, but what! Biological evolution in
these cases follows closely the physical constraints of survival and
reproduction and would not couple a nanosecond brain with a millisecond
muscle. Our engineering is much more arbitrary and we would find something
to do with the extra cycles, probably involving longer time scales. However
that "something" would not have to consider analog domains at all.

AT



-------------------------------------------
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

Reply via email to