Matt, On 5/16/08, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- Steve Richfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > *Does anyone else here share my dream of a worldwide AI with all of the > > knowledge of the human race to support it > > Yes > > > - built with EXISTING Wikipedia > > No. Wikipedia has the right idea that it reflects a consensus of > knowledge with instant peer review, which is usually more accurate than > individual knowledge. However, it is centralized, so it depends on > donations of money to keep running on a single server, rather than self > sustaining market driven contributions of computing resources in a > distributed environment.
I agree. The missing piece are tags to communicate important information that is NOT in the articles themselves, e.g. the regular expressions needed to recognize statements of ignorance and applicability of the article. These could be included in every page on the Internet, but current editors don't support new tags, so there is a chicken-or-egg problem here that may need a catalyst to get over. > and Dr. Eliza software and a little glue to hold it all together?* > > The "glue", the distributed search index or message routing service, will > be the major component of distributed AGI. Most of the intelligence will > go into directing messages to the right experts based on content, and > filtering spam. My plan is to use the system to routinely solve problems that are beyond all human experts, though sometimes a solution hinges on a particular issue that isn't adequately explained on-line. I don't currently see any way to efficiently automate the routing to experts without sending far more crap than good queries. Remember, just because your computer thinks that you must dig deeper into something than the on-line information supports does NOT mean that the user agrees. How do you plan to deal with the pissed-off experts who are bombarded with queries by disinterested users? Dr. Eliza reflects your personal agenda. Simply, Dr. Eliza works now, and I see NO other workable approach on the horizon, that shows any evidence that the really hard problems have been worked out.. It will be judged as a peer in a > competitive marketplace where information has negative value on average. THAT is why the only real hope is to graduate from the present information paradigm to a knowledge paradigm If you go against the majority, you will be blocked. I absolutely agree, as I have seen this ever so clearly. To get your message > out, you will either need to back up your claims with research, What sort of "research" did you have in mind? or back > off your claims to a personal case history, ... like how it took me 4 months on the Internet to do what should have been done in 10 minutes? or buy advertising from peers > with high reputations. I don't understand what you are suggesting here. Steve Richfield ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=103754539-40ed26 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
