Mike, On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 7:27 PM, Mike Tintner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Steve: > MT:My general point is that the proper business of AGI is problematic, > open, ill-structured problems (real world problems) for which ANY > predetermined method or structure of problem-solving is wrong, (or since > there is no "right" or "wrong" with such problems, "superineffective") - > and which usually demand (unstructured) investigation of the relevant > environment to find fresh options and evidence. > >From the remainder of your response, I see that we have different ideas what a "problem" is. Much of what you call a problem I would call an activity. Detailed comments follow,,, > > *Steve:I hear you, but I don't believe these to actually exist, except in > some (unstructured) people's minds. Can you exhibit one such problem for > dissection and discussion?* > > Steve: > > -Write me a program that will make producing a multimedia essay - > video/graphics/text/sound/etc. - easy and fast for almost everyone. > This is apparently beyond human capability, and hence apparently beyond present consideration. > > -Talk to me about your father.for three minutes. > Which requires knowledge about my father, who is now dead, gone, and left few surviving details. > > -Write an essay on "the meaning of life." > Being an AGI, it has no relevant experience to write about. > > -Tidy up your room > This is (apparently) beyond even my ability, and while some future AGI might conceivably do this, I wouldn't then know where things are, what with my archaeological filing system (chronological by depth). > > -Have sex with your partner. > Gee, I sure hope not. That is entirely MY job. > > -Have a daydream about having sex with Madonna or some celebrity. > This is a specifics-of-computation issue, and since we are trying to figure out here what works, this would seem to be a minimum an unnecessary constraint, and at worse serious shitforbrains programming. > > -Outline a political strategy to improve McCain's chances. > Or better yet, see that even the Iraq government wants us out of there, so instead work on improving Obama's chances. > > -Compose a story about an AGI going berserk in a totally new way. > Clearly a counterproductive pursuit. > > -Surf on the web for the next 10 mins. > Google already does this to form its directories. > > ANY formal creative problem - > My very first computer program (on an electromechanical Burroughs E-101 accounting machine) composed rock-n-roll melodies. Another one of my early computer programs composed all possible 12-tone melodies. I then printed out the four inch thick stack and filed it with the U.S. Copyright office. Hence, I have claim against any/all new 12-tone compositions. Have you ever attended a "computer generated art" contest? Some of it is pretty good. > > -how is memory laid down in the brain? > Even the entire human population is too stupid to engage in the efforts needed to get to the bottom of this, as I have recently explained here on this forum. > -invent an electric battery that will be half the price of the cheapest one > available > Beyond present human ability. -find the solution for the "theory of everything" in physics > Solutions are not what is "missing", but rather some experimental evidence to support it. -devise an additional branch of "metacognition" to go beyond logic > But then, logic would simply encompass metacognition, as it has encompassed Reverse Reductio ad Absurdum and Game Theory. Note that most of the above "problems" are "inductive" in nature, in that while no process points directly to their solution, prospective solutions can be "tested" for acceptability. This is precisely parallel with differential equations, where there is no process to go directly to the derivative of a formula, but almost anything can be integrated to see if you got back to the original formula. Such problems have a number of "weaknesses" to exploit to arrive at solutions, e.g. characterization, exhaustive search, class elimination, etc. > > COMMENT: > All of these problems you can deal with, and start to think about. But you > do not have complete structures - conscious or intuitive - for thinking > about any of them. > "Thinking" in the classical sense is certainly not necessary and may be inhibitive. For example, most Game Theory suitable problems confound "thinking" because thinking gets trapped into "if I do this, then he does that, then I do this, then..." loops. It will be extraordinary if you don't grope about quite a bit and get stuck > for a while in trying to solve them - as I'm sure you're aware if you cast > your mind back to any creative or programming or essaywriting thinking > you've ever done - or the last minute you spent on any reflective thinking. > > The reason you don't have structures is that it would be > wrong/superineffective to have structures for these types of > problems..Ideally, normatively, wrong. > Perhaps THIS is a fundamental reason why Dr. Eliza does so well compared with people. It incorporates structures that almost universally exist in problems that confound people, but people, being unaware of those structures, are unable to solve even relatively simple problems that require knowledge of such structures. Hmmm, an important idea. Thanks. > > All of these problems call for you to create a structure of problemsolving > and a structure of final solution ad hoc. There is no right way to start > thinking about how to write that computer program > THIS would sure start an argument in some quarters, e.g. structured programming. > - no right place to start, no right set of options, no right length for the > program, no right programming language, and ultimately no right, optimal > program. And the same is true for every other problem listed. > > The problems are open - how you define them is open, what constitutes a > solution is open, the options are open and often largely unknown, the > criteria that should be applied to judging them are open. > I see no value in superseding human creativity. Who would want to live in such a world?! YOU would be just a waste of skin in such a world. > > (And indeed with some of these problems, if you don't produce something > new, unpredictable and surprisingly different from any known structure, > you've automatically failed, and you're fired). > However, even something as simple/trivial as Dr. Eliza sometimes comes up with seemingly "new" approaches to dealing with new (to Dr. Eliza) problems. > > The reason you have this supergeneral, superadaptive intelligence that can > certainly begin to cope with all these - open problems that are continually > being thrown at you in real life, (and indeed a potentially infinite > diversity of them), is precisely that it isn't programmed to deal with them. > It can associate freely with these problems and throw ideas together, as you > throw clothes together to form an outfit, or foods to make a potpourri. > "Thrown together" connotes a structure. Structures can be programmed. Even Dr. Eliza "understands" 10 different types of cause-and-effect chain linkages, which I believe exceeds the length of most human's lists. > And it only acquires structures and automatic routines for dealing with > problems, as for all skills, secondarily, rather than primarily. > True. However, a few experts who look at these structures and extrapolate all reasonable structures can (maybe) develop a system from the start that would be at the asymptote of where an AGI might develop, given a million years or so of experience. That's' v. messy and revolts every rationalist, but far from being "kluge" > pace Gary Marcus' latest book, it's beautiful mechanical, computational > design, and the secret of AGI. > Again, you have ended your posting on a point of grand mutual agreement. This beauty must be understood for AGI's to ever "succeed" Note again in passing that I believe that these sorts of AGIs are VERY dangerous and are of little value. We neither need nor want really good computer-generated creativity, and when people start filling them with explosives and sending them out to blow up unbelievers, I suspect that everyone will finally see this. Steve Richfield ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=106510220-47b225 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
