So what is this "inorganic tissue" made from? silicon?
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 10:48:17AM +1000, Colin Hales wrote: > Hi Dorian et. al., > > I am going to have to piecemeal this. Up to armpits in crocs. Can't commit > to chat just yet. > > I have a suggestion for this bit > =============================== > 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) *I can do this (see below)* > - H-AGI can include all forms of computations: > algorithmic/non-algorithmic, analog/digital,* > quantum/classical. Organic/Inorganic. *H-AGI incorporates whatever level > of natural biophysics is thought essential to AGI operation. It is that > biophysics that introduces some desired level of natural computation into > the H-AGI. The biophysics is literally incorporated in the > processor/chipset. This could take the form of actual biological substrate > (cellular tissue) or it could be an inorganic version of some part of the > biophysics of the organic original. > - The reason for beginning a program of H-AGI works is that by virtue of > its retention of the natural biophysics, it allows us to scientifically > determine the role of the natural biophysics in intelligence. > Properties potentially lost the moment the boundary of any abstract model > of the biophysics is chosen. > - H-AGI recognises the significance of the loss of natural biophysics > has had essentially no attention in AI or AGI, both of which have been > confined to the 100% elimination of the natural biophysics. H-AGI commences > that investigation, not because of any particular knowledge, but because > the choice not to do it has had almost no attention since the inception of > AI. > > =========================================== > Next, I would add another whole section to Dorian's wet version of H-AGI: > the 'dry' inorganic version. The wet version sounds fine to me. No problem. > I don't claim to have thought deeply about that. So I defer to Dorian. > > For the dry H-AGI I have already generated an example (in the paper I have > already written). I show the natural original, the modelled version (C-AGI) > and the inorganic version (H-AGI). It is not synthetic S-AGI because it > doesn't have *all* the brain's biophysics. It only has that tiny proportion > of the natural physics being explored for its role in intelligence. It is > not C-AGI and it is not S-AGI. It is H-AGI. Somewhere in between. Where the > natural biophysics computation stops the abstract modelling (analog or > digital) takes over in its more traditional guises (computer or > neuromorphic chip). Dry H-AGI doesn't have *all* the brain's biophysics. > > Biological tissue usage is (wet) H-AGI because it introduces a proportion > of natural tissue (not the whole brain). All the biophysics, not all the > brain. Inorganic replication of biological tissue biophysics is H-AGI > because it retains part of the biophysics but is till not the whole brain. > Both wet and dry approaches are also H-AGI because they traditional > modelling as a form of container for the biophysics. > > (Aside: The organic/wet H-AGI and the inorganic/dry H-AGI could be classed > as quantum-mechanical in nature by virtue of the biophysics ultimately > being based on quantum processes. Classical physics is the only thing > needed to describe it at the functional/construction level. The properties > conferred through the quantum substrate are something to be argued *after > you built it, IMO*) > > *Summary* > Dorian wants to do H-AGI biologically. I want to do it inorganically. Both > are really hard. Neither are synthetic S-AGI because they also have > abstract modelling of other brain processes. If Dorian made a brain > entirely out of organics (no abstract computation/models) , that would be > synthetic. If I made a brain entirely out of inorganics (no abstract > computation/models), that would be synthetic. > > Wet *and* Dry H-AGI are needed in an expanded conceptual basis for AGI > future development. All that is required is to see that these initiatives > are currently unexplored and that the scientific knowledge needed to see > which approach offers what future, and thereby put the pure abstract > modelling approach on a scientific footing, is what the IGI is about. > > The Dry H-AGI section is what I want to add. I am hoping that we are on the > same page as regards the compartmentalisation of different approaches. > > Gnarly bits? Please advise. > > Gotta go ... panic prep for sale of my brother's house. > > regards > > Colin Hales > > > > ------------------------------------------- > AGI > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/5037279-a88c7a6d > 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
