Ben: How General AI has to be in order to be considered AGI? We may not have an answer however probably we will be able to determine experimentally once a H-AGI system is built (see iv). Clearly, one can start a successful business using AI and combining AI techniques- no need to be AGI
Some parts can be directly included in the paper ( i) The retention of the natural biophysics allows us to scientifically determine the role of the natural biophysics in intelligence ( Colin) (ii) The essential part of the system that was creating AGI would be my brain, not google (Ben) From (i) and (ii) *-Biological structure is able to integrate meaningful information which is an important task for any AGI system* Note: Information has a general sense, not necessarily Shannon terms (iii) The loss of natural biophysics has had essentially no attention in AI or AGI. It can be easily explained* everything started with a judgmental error *that came from neuroscience *The origins of the entire problem started a few decades ago *when by mistake action potentials were approximated by stereotyped digital events. As a result many scientists were encouraged to imagine that brain computations can be thoroughly simulated and mapped on digital computers using connectionist models. It became a mob opinion and in spite of recent refutation, this flawed view continued to be sustained and all brain initiatives followed this vision. However, understanding the brain language and the development of AI techniques are highly co-dependent (part of Introduction). (iii) *H- AGI needs to use a proportion of natural tissue, not necessarily the whole brain* That’s an important idea and it can be included in the paper We already know that biological substrate within our brain can “compute” however there is no coherent approach to unleash its power. While the process of computation in the brain is essentially a computer science problem many computer scientists cannot contribute since the digital model used to run algorithms provides only a "reduced model" of computation. Since understanding the brain language and the development of AI techniques are highly co-dependent we need to think differently. Both problems can be thoroughly solved by creating a new substrate for computation using the intrinsic power of biological building blocks. (iv) *Goals of H-AGI **It will be a new tool for discovery, far more powerful than any digital system alone.* Equipped with adequate software any personal computer is a tool that can be used by anyone to communicate, analyze all kind of data, print 3D objects, broadcast television.... Steve Jobs solved this technological problem of building personal computers three decades ago. Did Jobs envision a smart phone in early 80s, a 3D printer at home,... probably not. Imagine what H-AGI would be able to do. Dorian *Success is a matter of identifying new opportunities and concentrate all efforts in right direction* On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Benjamin Kapp <[email protected]> wrote: > For AGI, I wonder how General AI has to be in order to be considered AGI. > If a AI system can only play chess we would say that is a bit too narrow to > be considered AGI. If it can play a bunch of Atari games then certainly > this is far more general than being designed to play a single game. Would > this be AGI? I don't think you can call something AGI based solely on its > results (number of games it can play), this is because i could wire > together a bunch of narrow AI's each specifically design for each of the > games. For example i could have one for playing chess, a different one for > playing breakout, a third for space invaders, and so on and so forth. Then > i could have a system that detects which game we are presented with and it > could then select the appropriate narrow AI to play the game. The system > as a whole would appear to be a general AI based on its results, but of > course its essential nature would be that of a narrow AI. As such you > can't classify an AI system as AI or AGI solely based on results. The > implementation details are needed to make the classification. > > Does this make sense? > > On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 12:17 PM, Logan Streondj <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> watson is as much or more AGI as OpenCOG applying same core to different >> domains and getting good results for-example jeopardy, cooking and medicine. >> >> Dorian Aur <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Ben, very useful survey, excellent key points: >>> 1.Training on text based models does not generate AGI - IBM's Watson >>> 2.The essential part of the system that was creating AGI would be my >>> brain, not google >>> Conclusion: *Wiring together a bunch of non AGI systems may never >>> generate AGI* >>> >>> Mike: "I don't like the way that people create things that are >>> intentionally difficult and known only to the in-group." >>> You are right, we should try to avoid anything that is too >>> specific/specialized (e.g biological engineering pluripotent cells and >>> related topics) it makes little sense in other fields >>> >>> 1. The paper should present our general vision, simple sentences easy >>> to understand in computer science or engineering >>> 2. The basic idea is simple - working on a "reduced model" of >>> computation (digital -Turing) may never lead to AGI >>> In addition to algorithms that can run on digital computers one can use >>> biological building blocks to build a "full model of computation". One >>> can shape and "program" a biological structure and "connected" it with >>> digital computers to develop human like intelligence. *It will be the >>> new tool for discovery, far more powerful than any digital system alone.* >>> 3. At least two phases are needed to construct "a mind" using >>> biological building blocks - see the two step implementation (A &B) >>> they need to be briefly mentioned. Details regarding other sub-steps in >>> biological engineering implementation should make the object of a >>> more specialized paper >>> >>> At this point in time everyone can understand that we need to solve a >>> technological problem. Many academic labs are highly specialized and >>> can be our collaborators. They may have the knowledge however they do not >>> have enough resources and their main goal is not to pursue bigger >>> technological projects ( see similar projects- Manhattan Project -gov, >>> German Rocket von Braun's technology -gov, computer and iPhone Job's >>> technology - private, Venter's technology - private). >>> >>> >>> Why we may need political lobbying? They've strongly misled that our >>> brain can be thoroughly mapped and fully simulated on digital computers >>> >>> Note: The two step implementation is just one way to approach the >>> development of H-AGI >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 7:48 PM, Mark Seveland <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Just a suggestion. Google+ Meetups are a good way for everyone to meet >>>> each other, and in live voice and/or video chat discuss topics. >>>> >>>> On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 7:33 PM, Colin Hales <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Dorian et. al., >>>>> I am having trouble getting time to properly participate here because >>>>> of family stuff and my other commitments. I'm checking in to acknowledge >>>>> how encouraging it is to see the activity is ongoing, and the birth of a >>>>> possible paper that might underpin whatever this IGI initiative turns >>>>> into. >>>>> >>>>> I'd like to focus my efforts on the paper primarily as a way to >>>>> discover IGI directions. So if you could bear with a patchy contribution >>>>> from me for a little while it would be greatly appreciated. I have a >>>>> particularly difficult week ahead of me. There's no huge crashing need for >>>>> speed here, so I'm hoping slow and steady might be OK. >>>>> >>>>> Whatever form this website takes: fantastic. It may only ever be a >>>>> 'line in the sand'. But it's a significant one in the greater scheme of >>>>> AGI >>>>> futures and really good to see after being sidelined for so long. Yay! >>>>> >>>>> cheers >>>>> Colin Hales >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 10:07 AM, Mike Archbold <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Why don't you just call it "AI" and if somebody asks THEN you can >>>>>> clarify it? I mean, why be arcane about it? One of the reasons I got >>>>>> into AI is because I don't like the way that people create things that >>>>>> are intentionally difficult and known only to the in-group. Now here >>>>>> you go with a boatload of new acronyms, known only to the select tiny >>>>>> group that knows the secret meaning behind it. So, I guess I am >>>>>> getting into Alan Grimes vent space with this. >>>>>> >>>>>> On 5/20/15, Dorian Aur <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> > *Colin et al,* >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > A possible plan for H-AGI towards S-AGI paper >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > *Hybrid artificial general intelligent systems towards S-AGI* >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > *Introduction* – a short presentation of AI systems and general >>>>>> goal to >>>>>> > build human general intelligence >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Why H-AGI? >>>>>> > >>>>>> > - Present different forms of computation , ( particular forms of >>>>>> > computation analog, digital -Turing machines ) >>>>>> > - Computations in the brain (examples of computations that are >>>>>> hardly >>>>>> > replicated on digital computers) >>>>>> > - H-AGI can include all forms of computations, algorithmic / >>>>>> > non-algorithmic, analog, digital,* quantum and classical *since >>>>>> > biological structure is incorporated in the system >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > *Steps to develop H-AGI* >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > - A. Build the structure using either natural stem cells or >>>>>> induced >>>>>> > pluripotent cells a three-dimensional vascularized structure, >>>>>> test 3D >>>>>> > printing possibilities >>>>>> > - Shape the structure and control spatial organization of cells >>>>>> > - Detect the need of neurotrophic factors, nutrients and oxygen >>>>>> ...use >>>>>> > nanosensor devices, carbon nanotubes... >>>>>> > - Regulate, control the entire phenomenon using a computer >>>>>> interface, >>>>>> > ability to use combine analog/digital and biophysical >>>>>> computations >>>>>> > >>>>>> > B. Train the hybrid system >>>>>> > >>>>>> > - Enhance bidirectional communication between biological >>>>>> structure and >>>>>> > computers >>>>>> > - Create and use a virtual world to provide accelerated >>>>>> training, use >>>>>> > machine learning, DL, digital/algorithmic AI or AGI if >>>>>> something is >>>>>> > developed on digital systems >>>>>> > - The interactive training system should also shape the >>>>>> evolution of >>>>>> > biological structure, natural language and visual information >>>>>> can be >>>>>> > progressively included >>>>>> > >>>>>> > see details in Can we build a conscious machine, >>>>>> > http://arxiv.org/abs/1411.5224 >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > *Goals of H-AGI* >>>>>> > >>>>>> > H-AGI can be seen as a transitional step required to understand >>>>>> which >>>>>> > parts can be fully replicated in a synthetic form to build a more >>>>>> powerful >>>>>> > system, >>>>>> > >>>>>> > · Natural language processing, robotics... >>>>>> > >>>>>> > · Space exploration, colonization..... etc >>>>>> > >>>>>> > · Techniques for therapy (brain diseases, cancer ....) since >>>>>> we will >>>>>> > learn how to shape biological structure >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Dorian >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > PS This brief presentation may also provide an idea about possible >>>>>> > collaboration list 1- list 3 >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 11:20 PM, Mike Archbold < >>>>>> [email protected]> >>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>> > >>>>>> >> > 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/303/17795807-366cfa2a >>>>>> >> 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/303/11943661-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/303/11721311-20a65d4a >>>>>> 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> >>>>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/27079473-66e47b26> | >>>>> Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription >>>>> <http://www.listbox.com> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Regards, >>>> Mark Seveland >>>> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >>>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/17795807-366cfa2a> | >>>> 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/303/5037279-a88c7a6d> | >>> Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription >>> <http://www.listbox.com> >>> >> >> Sent from my Android device with Emails. >> *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/303/17795807-366cfa2a> | > 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/303/21088071-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
