>> IMO, creating an AGI isn't really a programming problem. The hard part is
>> knowing exactly what to program.
Which is why it turns into a programming problem . . . . I started out as
a biochemist studying enzyme kinetics. The only reasonable way to get a
reasonable turn-around time on testing a new "fancy formula" was to update the
simulation program myself.
If the tools were there (i.e. Loosemoore's environment), it wouldn't be a
programming problem. Since they aren't, the programming turns into a/the real
problem. :-)
----- Original Message -----
From: Shane Legg
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 1:34 PM
Subject: **SPAM** Re: [agi] My proposal for an AGI agenda
On 3/23/07, David Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have a Math minor from University but in 32 years of computer work, I
haven't used more than grade 12 Math in any computer project yet.
...
I created a bond comparison program for a major wealth investment firm that
used a pretty fancy formula at it's core but I just typed it in. I didn't
have to create it, prove it or even understand exactly why it was any good.
IMO, creating an AGI isn't really a programming problem. The hard part is
knowing exactly what to program. The same was probably true of your bond
program: The really hard part was originally coming up with that 'fancy
formula'
which you just had to type in.
Thus far math has proven very useful in many areas of artificial intelligence,
just pick up any book on machine learning such as Bishop's. Whether it will
also be of large use for AGI... only time will tell.
Shane
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303
-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303
