On Dec 8, 2007 5:33 PM, Dennis Gorelik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What you describe - is set of AGI nodes. > AGI prototype is just one of such node. > AGI researcher doesn't have to develop all set at once. It's quite > sufficient to develop only one AGI node. Such node will be able to > work on single PC. >
Then I'd like to quantify terminology. What is the sum of N "AGI Nodes" where N > 1? Is that a community of discrete AGI, or a single multi-nodal entity? I don't imagine that a single node is initially much more than a narrow-AI data miner. The twist that separates this from any commercially available OLAP cube processor is the infrastructure for aquiring new information from distributed nodes. In this sense, I imagine that the internode communications and transaction record contains the 'complexity' (from another recent thread) that allows interesting behaviors to emerge - if not AGI, then at least a novelty worth pursuing. If the node that was a PC on the internet is a CPU in a supercomputer (or a PC in a Beowulf cluster) is it more or less a part of the whole? Semantically I'm not sure you can say "this node is an AGI" any more than you can say "This neuron contains the intelligence" I do agree with you that any intelligence that is capable of asking/answering a question can be considered a 'node' in distributed AGI. But this high level of agreement makes many assumptions about shared definitions of important terms. I would like to investigate those definitions without the typical bickering about who is right or wrong because (imo) there are only different perspectives. The first team to produce AGI will not necessarily disprove that any other strategy will not work. ----- 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=74013728-9789fb
