> > Nearly any AGI component can be used within a narrow AI, > > That proves my point [that AGI project can be successfully split > into smaller narrow AI subprojects], right?
Yes, but it's a largely irrelevant point. Because building a narrow-AI system in an AGI-compatible way is HARDER than building that same narrow-AI component in a non-AGI-compatible way. So, given the pressures of commerce and academia, people who are motivated to make narrow-AI for its own sake, will almost never create narrow-AI components that are useful for AGI. And, anyone who creates narrow-AI components with an AGI outlook, will have a large disadvantage in the competition to create optimal narrow-AI systems given limited time and financial resources. > Still, AGI-oriented researcher can pick appropriate narrow AI projects > in a such way that: > 1) Narrow AI project will be considerably less complex than full AGI > project. > 2) Narrow AI project will be useful by itself. > 3) Narrow AI project will be an important building block for the full > AGI project. > > Would you agree that splitting very complex and big project into > meaningful parts considerably improves chances of success? Yes, sure ... but demanding that these meaningful parts -- be economically viable and/or -- beat competing, somewhat-similar components in competitions dramatically DECREASES chances of success ... That is the problem. An AGI may be built out of narrow-AI components, but these narrow-AI components must be architected for AGI-integration, which is a lot of extra work; and considered as standalone narrow-AI components, they may not outperform other similar narrow-Ai components NOT intended for AGI-integration... -- Ben G ----- 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=69277648-780726
