On Nov 30, 2007 12:03 AM, Dennis Gorelik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Benjamin, > > >> 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. > > Even if this is the case (which is not) that would simply mean several > development steps: > 1) Develop narrow AI with non-reusable AI component and get rewarded > for that (because it would be useful system by itself).
Obviously, most researchers who have developed useful narrow-AI components have not gotten rich from it. The nature of our economy and society is such that most scientific and technical innovators are not dramatically financially rewarded. > 2) Refactor non-reusable AI component into reusable AI component and > get rewarded for that (because it would reusable component for sale). > 3) Apply reusable AI component in AGI and get rewarded for that. > ----- 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=70648456-e5f42e
