Jim,
The importance of the point here is NOT primarily about AGI systems having to
make this distinction. Yes, a real AGI robot will probably have to make this
distinction as an infant does - but in terms of practicality, that's an awful
long way away.
The importance is this: real AGI is about dealing with a world of living
creatures in a myriad ways - those living creatures, are all fundamentally
unpredictable. Ergo most AGI activities and problems involve dealing with a
fundamentally unpredictable world.
Narrow AI - and all rational technology - and all attempts-at-AGI to date are
predicated on dealing with a predictable world. (All the additions of
probabilities and uncertainties to date do not change this basic assumption).
All your personal logical and mathematical exercises are based on a predictable
world. An AGI TSP equivalent for you would be what I already said - how would
you deal with deciding a travel route to a set of *mobile*, *unpredictable*
destinations?
This recognition of fundamental unpredictability totally transforms the way you
look at the world - and the kind of problems you have to deal with - makes you
aware of the v. different, non-rational problems that real humans do deal with.
And BTW it doesn't really matter if you are a determinist - for the plain
reality of life is that the only evidence we have is of living creatures and
humans behaving unpredictably. There might for argument's sake be some divine
determinist plan revealing the underlying laws of living behaviour - but it
sure as heck ain't available to anyone (not to mention that it doesn't exist)
and we have to proceed accordingly.
From: Jim Bromer
Sent: Monday, June 28, 2010 5:20 PM
To: agi
Subject: Re: [agi] A Primary Distinction for an AGI
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 11:15 AM, Mike Tintner <tint...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
Inanimate objects normally move *regularly,* in *patterned*/*pattern* ways,
and *predictably.*
Animate objects normally move *irregularly*, * in *patchy*/*patchwork* ways,
and *unbleedingpredictably* .
This presumption looks similar (in some profound way) to many of the
presumptions that were tried in the early days of AI, partly because computers
lacked memory and they were very slow. It's unreliable just because we need
the AGI program to be able to consider situations when, for example, inanimate
objects move in patchy patchwork ways or in unpredictable patterns.
Jim Bromer
agi | Archives | Modify Your Subscription
-------------------------------------------
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=8660244-6e7fb59c
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
