Hi, > One thing that I personally want to see is for each group to > define its goal in more details so we can understand how the > AGI "products" are differentiated. Right now the situation, > as I see it, is that we're still struggling to create the > first marketable product. I think the long-term success of > any AGI design would depend largely on the company's market > position more than superiority in technology.
I think we have a significant disagreement about the relationship between AGI research and business. I don't see why you think having marketable products is essential to AGI research. AGI is about building a digital mind, and doesn't *have* to be any more about business than raising a child, except for the cost of R&D. In fact, my own team is now developing and selling useful products & services as a way to make money to fund AGI research. But this isn't a necessity, and we might well stop doing so if we received a significant amount of pure AGI R&D funding. I suspect that whomever gets to a workable human-level AGI system first will be able to make a lot of money, either by themselves or (more likely) in partnership with some existing large company. Of course if it's a non-business-savvy person they could also get screwed by some large company and wind up not benefiting personally. But it could happen that a small, poorly-funded team gets to an infrahuman AGI ... fails to profit considerably or take their research to the next level ... and then a larger, better-funded commercial team winds up creating a human-level AGI based on improving their ideas.... Of course there are a lot of scenarios! -- Ben G ------- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
