> A summary ....we are looking at the idea that there are 2 fundamental kinds > of putative AGI (1) & (3), and their hybrid (2) that forms a third approach > as follows: > > (1) C-AGI computer substrate only. Neuromorphic equivalents of it. > (2) H-AGI hybrid of (1) and (3). The inorganic version is a new kind > of neuromorphic chip. The organic version has ... erm... organics in it. > (3) S-AGI synthetic AGI. organic or inorganic. Natural brain physics > only. No computer. > > (aside: S-AGI just came out of my fingers. I hope this is OK, Dorian!) >
This is a cool idea, somewhat mind boggling in its possibilities. Cool though! Personally I would favor something more like "EM-AGI" for electromagnetic AGI. I mean, I don't understand the details of the approach, only the generalities. But, "S" seems a bit vague/ambiguous while EM hits it more or less on target IMHO. MIke A > Think this way: What we have now is 100% computer. S-AGI is 100% natural > physics (organic or inorganic). H-AGI is set somewhere in between. It's > the level of computer computation/natural computation that is at issue. All > are computation. > > The human brain is a natural version of (3) with a neuronal/astrocyte > substrate. (3) has no computer whatever in it. it retains all the natural > physics (whatever that is). H-AGI targets the inclusion of the essential > natural brain physics in the substrate of (2) and to incorporate (1) > computer-substrates and software to an extent to be determined. In my case > an H-AGI would be inorganic. Others see differently. > > Where you might have a stake in this? > > The history of AGI can be summed up as an experiment that seeks to see if > the role of (1) C-AGI as a brain is fundamentally indistinguishable from > (3) S-AGI under all conditions. That is the hypothesis. The 65 year old bet > that has attracted 100% of the investment to date. H-AGI does not make that > presupposition and seeks to contrast (1) and (3) in revealing ways that > then allow us to speak authoritatively about the (1)/(3) relationship in > AGI potential. Only then will we really understand the difference between > (1) and (3). So far that difference is entirely and intuition. A good one. > But only intuition. Its time for that intuition to be turned into science. > Experiments in (1) have ruled to date. Now we seek to do some (2)... E.E. > we have 65 years of 'control' subject. H-AGI builds the first 'test' > subject. > > How about this? > > What would be super cool is if this mighty AGI beast you intend making > could be turned into the brain of a robot. Then we could contrast what it > does with what an IGI candidate brain does in an identical robot in the > same test. That kind of testing vision (as far off as it may seem) is a > potential way your work and the IGI might interface. Which candidate robot > best encounters radical novelty, without any human intervention/involvement > whatever? .... is a really good question. To do this test you'd not need to > reveal anything about its workings. Observed robot behaviour is decisive. > > It seems to me that whatever venture you plan, it might be wise to keep an > eye on any (2)/(3) approaches. IGI or not. Because it is directly informing > expectations of outcomes in (1). We are currently asking the question "*If > H-AGI were to be championed into existence, what would the first vehicle > for that look like?*" If the enthusiasm maintains it will be sketched into > a web page and we'll see what it tells us and what to do next. It may halt. > It may go. I don't know. Worth a shot? You bet. > > With your (1) C-AGI glasses firmly strapped to your head, your wisdom at > all stages in this would be well received, whatever the messages. So if you > have time to keep an eye on happenings, I for one would appreciate it. > > regards > > Colin Hales > > > > On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 6:58 AM, Peter Voss <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Thanks for asking. Haven’t followed the IGI discussions. >> >> >> >> Is this about non-computer based approaches to AGI? If so, I don’t think >> I have anything positive to contribute. >> >> >> >> More generally, non-profit orgs need strong focus and champions. And >> specific goals. >> >> >> >> *From:* Benjamin Kapp [mailto:[email protected]] >> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 19, 2015 12:23 PM >> *To:* AGI >> *Subject:* Re: [agi] Institute of General Intelligence (IGI) >> >> >> >> Mr. Voss, >> >> Given your understanding of the AGI community do you believe an IGI would >> be redundant? Would your organization be open to collaborating with the >> IGI? Do you have any advice for how we could be successful in starting >> up >> this organization? Perhaps you would be open to being a member of the >> board? >> >> >> >> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 2:03 PM, Peter Voss <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Not something that can be adequately covered in a few words, but…. “We’re >> building a fully integrated, top-down & bottom-up, real-time, adaptive >> knowledge (& skill) representation, learning and reasoning engine. We’re >> using a combination of graph representation and NN techniques overlaid >> with >> fuzzy, adaptive rule systems” – ha! >> >> >> >> Here again are links for some clues: >> >> >> >> >> http://www.kurzweilai.net/essentials-of-general-intelligence-the-direct-path-to-agi >> >> http://www.realagi.com/index.html >> >> https://www.facebook.com/groups/RealAGI/ >> >> >> >> >> >> *From:* Benjamin Kapp [mailto:[email protected]] >> >> >> >> Mr. Voss, >> >> Since you are the founder I'm certain you know what agi-3's methodology >> is. In a few words (maybe more?) could you share with us what that is? >> >> >> >> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Peter Voss <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> *>*http://www.agi-3.com They just glue together anything and everything >> that works. >> >> Actually, no. We have a very specific theory of AGI and architecture >> >> *Peter Voss* >> >> *Founder, AGI Innovations Inc.* >> >> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/26973278-698fd9ee>| >> 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/303/231420-b637a2b0>| 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/303/11721311-20a65d4a> | >> Modify >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> >> Your Subscription <http://www.listbox.com> >> > > > > ------------------------------------------- > 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
