On 11/2/07, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Google uses a cluster of 10^6 CPUs, enough to keep a copy of the searchable > part of the Internet in RAM.
And a list of millions of hits is the ideal way to represent the results, right? Ask.com is publicly mocking this fact in an effort to make themselves look better. Kartoo.com does a good job of presenting the relationship of search results to each other. Suppose you get a tip about some cog sci research that might be relevant to AGI. You ask one of your undergraduate assistants to dig up everything they can find about it. Sure, they use Google. They use Lexisnexis. They use a dozen primary data gathering tools. Knowing you don't want 4Gb of text, they summarize all the information into what they believe you are actually asking for - based on earlier requests you have made, their own understanding of what you are looking for and whatever they learn during the data collection process. A good research assistant gets recruited for graduate work, a bad research assistant probably gets a pat on the back at the end of the semester. My question was about the feasibility of a narrow-AI research agent as a useful step towards AGI. Even if it's not fully adaptable for general tasks, the commercial viability of moderate success would be profitable. Or is commercial viability too mundane a consideration for ivory tower AGI research? ----- 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=8660244&id_secret=60737904-74aafd
