There're several reasons why AGI teams are fragmented and AGI designers don't want to join a consortium:
A. believe that one's own AGI design is superior B. want to ensure that the global outcome of AGI is "friendly" C. want to get bigger financial rewards (A) does not really prevent a founder to join an AGI consortium; it'll actually help them recruit more like-minded people and evolve their architectures faster. (B) causes some founders to be paranoid about secrecy and protection, in particular, not wanting the general public to be in possession of AGI (either source code or the software). I predict that this view would be less popular when a (semi-)open AGI project appears. (C) causes some founders not to participate for fear of losing competitive business advantage. I'm not sure how great a concern this is. But remember that, sooner or later, commercial AGI projects will have to compete with each other in the market. Some projects will lose market share dramatically because of winner-takes-all and positive-feedback. We have to choose between: 1. working separately (and thus everybody would have to work much harder) as well as competing, and eventually accepting a winner-takes-all outcome. 2. joining the consortium (members would still compete within it), while having some safety mechanisms: a contribution will count even after it's been replaced by a derived idea; a single contribution may be useful to multiple branches; etc. I think Novamente's current mode of operation is pretty much semi-open already (since so many have worked there) and is just a small step from using my consortium idea -- if Ben is willing to give up complete control of his AGI design.... YKY ----- 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=e9e40a7e
