Pei, First it would seem you need to come to a consensus definition of "intelligence" and Im not sure how much your theory would or would need to cover anything beyond the definition there?
James Ratcliff Pei Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Well, I surely don't mean AIXI type of theory. I believe that all kinds of intelligence can be explained as the capability of adaptation with insufficient knowledge and resources. I understand that you don't share this understanding of intelligence. Pei On 4/15/07, Benjamin Goertzel wrote: > > > > > > > > According to my belief, the way to create AGI is to have a general > > theory of intelligence, which should cover the common principle under > > all kinds of intelligent systems, including human intelligence, > > computer intelligence, etc., even alien intelligence and superhuman > > AGI. Therefore, this theory should also cover your AGI0 to AGIn. > > > > Ahhh.... > > Well, this gets at the crux of our disagreement. > > I have my doubts that such a theory is possible. I think it may be > possible to create a general theory of "roughly human level intelligence" > ... > just as Hutter and colleagues seem to be hot on the trail of a general > theory of "near infinite computational power intelligence". > > But I suspect that computer systems with processing power and memory > vastly greater than humans but vastly less than is needed for algorithms > like Hutter's AIXItl to be possible, will display forms of intelligence that > aren't covered by either the Hutter-type theories, nor the theories covering > roughly-human-level intelligence... > > True, there may be commonalities between sub-AIXItl-level superhuman, human > level, and AIXItl level intelligences. But, I suspect the differences will > be > at least as dramatic... > > As examples, I think that the sorts of self, awareness and "perceived free > will" that characterize human mind may not apply to all superhuman > intelligences. > > I can certainly imagine a superhuman AGI whose cognition is governed by > complex, emergent patterns that are beyond human comprehension. I might > be able to understand in some general sense that its behaviors are guided > by emergent patterns, that it seems to be engaged in calculating > probabilities, > etc. -- but the main structures and dynamics guiding its cognition might be > new principles, which apply only to minds vastly smarter than humans and > can't be grokked by mere human brains... > > -- Ben > > > > ________________________________ > 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/?&; ----- 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/?&; _______________________________________ James Ratcliff - http://falazar.com Looking for something... --------------------------------- Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell? Check outnew cars at Yahoo! Autos. ----- 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/?member_id=231415&user_secret=fabd7936
