Re: [agi] Microsoft Launches Singularity
On 25/03/2008, Mark Waser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You're thinking too small. The AGI will distribute itself. And money is likely to be: - rapidly deflated, - then replaced with a new, alternate currency that truly values talent and effort (rather than just playing with the money supply -- aka interest, commissions, inheritances, etc.) - while everyone's basic needs (most particularly water, food, shelter, energy, education, and health care) are provided for free So your brilliant arbitrage to become rich is unlikely to be of much value just a few years later. The arrival of smarter than human intelligence will bring about changes which are hard to anticipate, and somehow I doubt that this will mean that we all live in some kind of utopia. The only historical precedent which I can think of is the emergence of homo sapiens and the effects which that had upon other human species living at the time. This must have been quite a revolution, because the new species was able to manufacture many different types of tools and therefore survive in environments which were previously inaccessible, or perform more efficiently within existing ones. There may be a period where proto-AGIs are available and companies can use these as get rich quick schemes of various kinds to radically automate processes and jobs which were previously performed manually. But once the real deal arrives then even the captains of industry are themselves likely to be overthrown. Ultimately evolutionary forces will decide what happens, as has always been the case. --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Microsoft Launches Singularity
My thinking is not too small. Anymore than any other person on this distribution list. But that is not why this response. My response is to be able to clarify what I meant. I'm not disagreeing - not was I trying to sound brilliant. I'm certainly not suggesting that I will be the one to invent it. In fact, ad what I was suggesting, is that I'm more likely to extend an open source project (at some point when it shows human-level intelligence), and package it as an expert system to solve specific domain problems (and yes - this is still AGI - but directed to a subset of its capabilities) and sell it, to a company with much more distribution power than I myself can create. I merely stated, So, the creators of the first several AGIs will be kings for a decent amount of time. Even a narrowly focussed AGI as an expert system, can be sold for billions. I can't predict, or define, what the real deal is likely to be. To me, AGI of human-like intelligence, or even super human intelligence, does not mean you have machines running around masquerading as humans and taking our jobs. That - it probably well beyond my lifetime (I'm tuning 40 this summer). I also am suggesting a very soft takeoff. Singularity, if it comes, is likely to come slowly after AGI. I consider AGI the true deal. It's an all or nothing thing to create a machine that can think for itself. If you create an AGI with 5 year old intelligence, and can get progressively smarter, and start to make predictions based on what it learned over time, is that not the real deal? Ok. If it is (and I believe it is), it's a box on my desk. Going back to the first businesses and bartering systems, would this box become the only vendor? Can it entertain people by playing a role at a theatre, or dance, or strap on a guitar and play flamenc music that brings you to tears. I doubt it. Now, let me ask you a question: Do you believe that all AI / AGI researchers are toiling over all this for the challenge, or purely out of interest? I doubt that as well. Surely there are those elements as drivers - BUT SO IS MONEY. This stuff IS the maker of the next software giant. If this is not the case, how the hell are researchers ever going to get funding? If there is no financial return - forget about funding. Philanthropists (who often do not look for a purely financial return) have better uses of their money than to fund AGI research. You can call future currency whatever you like. Yes, it is like to change form - but certainly not purpose. And Marxism, where maybe AGI or the real deal with deflate currency, is an unlikely aftermath of the advent of AGI. There are tons of applications for it - and for the first several groups that create it - IF they can market it - will be kings for a decent amount of time. No empire lives forever. ~Aki Non-AI reseacher Businessman On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 5:24 AM, Bob Mottram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 25/03/2008, Mark Waser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You're thinking too small. The AGI will distribute itself. And money is likely to be: - rapidly deflated, - then replaced with a new, alternate currency that truly values talent and effort (rather than just playing with the money supply -- aka interest, commissions, inheritances, etc.) - while everyone's basic needs (most particularly water, food, shelter, energy, education, and health care) are provided for free So your brilliant arbitrage to become rich is unlikely to be of much value just a few years later. The arrival of smarter than human intelligence will bring about changes which are hard to anticipate, and somehow I doubt that this will mean that we all live in some kind of utopia. The only historical precedent which I can think of is the emergence of homo sapiens and the effects which that had upon other human species living at the time. This must have been quite a revolution, because the new species was able to manufacture many different types of tools and therefore survive in environments which were previously inaccessible, or perform more efficiently within existing ones. There may be a period where proto-AGIs are available and companies can use these as get rich quick schemes of various kinds to radically automate processes and jobs which were previously performed manually. But once the real deal arrives then even the captains of industry are themselves likely to be overthrown. Ultimately evolutionary forces will decide what happens, as has always been the case. -- *agi* | Archives http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ | Modifyhttp://www.listbox.com/member/?;Your Subscription http://www.listbox.com -- Aki R. Iskandar [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- agi Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed:
Re: [agi] Microsoft Launches Singularity
Now, let me ask you a question: Do you believe that all AI / AGI researchers are toiling over all this for the challenge, or purely out of interest? I doubt that as well. Surely there are those elements as drivers - BUT SO IS MONEY. Aki, you don't seem to understand the psychology of the AGI researcher very well. Firstly, academic AGI researchers are not in it for the $$, and are unlikely to profit from their creations no matter how successful. Yes, spinoffs from academia to industry exist, but the point is that academic work is motivated by love of science and desire for STATUS more so than desire for money. Next, Singularitarian AGI researchers, even if in the business domain (like myself), value the creation of AGI far more than the obtaining of material profits. I am very interested in deriving $$ from incremental steps on the path to powerful AGI, because I think this is one of the better methods available for funding AGI RD work. But deriving $$ from human-level AGI really is not a big motivator of mine. To me, once human-level AGI is obtained, we have something of dramatically more interest than accumulation of any amount of wealth. Yes, I assume that if I succeed in creating a human-level AGI, then huge amounts of $$ for research will come my way, along with enough personal $$ to liberate me from needing to manage software development contracts or mop my own floor. That will be very nice. But that's just not the point. I'm envisioning a population of cockroaches constantly fighting over crumbs of food on the floor. Then a few of the cockroaches -- let's call them the Cockroach Robot Club -- decide to spend their lives focused on creating a superhuman robot which will incidentally allow cockroaches to upload into superhuman form with superhuman intelligence. And the other cockroaches insist that Cockroach Robot Club's motivation in doing this must be a desire to get more crumbs of food. After all, just **IMAGINE** how many crumbs of food you'll be able to get with that superhuman robot on your side!!! Buckets full of crumbs!!! ;-) -- Ben G --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Microsoft Launches Singularity
On 25/03/2008, Aki Iskandar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You can call future currency whatever you like. Yes, it is like to change form - but certainly not purpose. And Marxism, where maybe AGI or the real deal with deflate currency, is an unlikely aftermath of the advent of AGI. I think the idea is that are proto-AGIs emerge the levels of automation possible within industry and society generally will rise. Just like the introduction of the steam engine this would reduce costs and increase the speed of production and delivery of goods and services. In the soft takeoff scenario there will be a period of time where increasing automation below the level of human general intelligence brings many benefits, and huge wealth to new new breed of super-industrialists. Probably the next Bill Gates will be running some kind of automation empire, delivering services via robotics. --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
RE: [agi] Microsoft Launches Singularity
I see the pattern as much more of the same. You now have Microsoft SQL Server, Microsoft Internet Information Server, Microsoft Exchange Server and then you'll have Microsoft Intelligence Server or Microsoft Cognitive Server. It'll be limited by licenses, resources and features. The cool part though would be when you can link them together like with Federations in Microsoft Communications Server. I don't see any of this all our problems will be solved scenario since companies still need to make a buck and the same old human vices are not going away. Nanotechnological AGI perhaps with software AGI influence has the potential to change everything beyond recognition. Plain old software AGI will be constrained for a while. John From: Bob Mottram [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] A more likely scenario is that someone else creates an AGI and then Microsoft copies it some time later. But seriously, if someone does manage to produce a working AGI it's probably game over for software engineering and software companies as we know them today. On 24/03/2008, Aki Iskandar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ben - your email scared me. I thought the evil empire (I can say that since I worked for them for a few years) achieved *some* level of cognition / AGI ... even the most rudimentary signs of intelligence / learned behavior - prediction machine. Whew! It's not that at all! I know they are interested in expert systems for the verticals (for new server product offerings), and in narrow AI for their current offerings, but I don't have any confirmations on their intent to create an AGI. I would imagine it is one of their goals over at MS Research - but maybe not. --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] The Effect of Application of an Idea
On 24/03/2008, Jim Bromer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To try to understand what I am talking about, start by imagining a simulation of some physical operation, like a part of a complex factory in a Sim City kind of game. In this kind of high-level model no one would ever imagine all of the objects should interact in one stereotypical way, different objects would interact with other objects in different kinds of ways. And no one would imagine that the machines that operated on other objects in the simulation were not also objects in their own right. For instance the machines used in production might require the use of other machines to fix or enhance them. And the machines might produce or operate on objects that were themselves machines. When you think about a simulation of some complicated physical systems it becomes very obvious that different kinds of objects can have different effects on other objects. And yet, when it comes to AI, people go on an on about systems that totally disregard this seemingly obvious divergence of effect that is so typical of nature. Instead most theories see insight as if it could be funneled through some narrow rational system or other less rational field operations where the objects of the operations are only seen as the ineffective object of the pre-defined operations of the program. How would this differ from the sorts of computational systems I have been muttering about? Where you have an architecture where an active bit of code or program is equivalent to an object in the above paragraph. Also have a look at Eurisko by Doug Lenat. Will Pearson --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Microsoft Launches Singularity
Ben - you're absolutely correct. I don't have a good grasp of the psychology of the AGI researcher. This is because, at this point, I'm not an AGI researcher. My only viewpoint is currently from the business side. However, and despite not being trained in science, I have been a professional programmer for most of my adult life (I currently manage large software projects for others, and am trying to get a couple non-AGI projects of my own off the ground - and so I'm not programming nearly as much as I used to). I am absolutely excited, and interested, in the prospect of AGI. So much so, that I am currently taking computer science mathematics courses now (within the MIS curriculum at CSU, which is the closest University to me) - and starting this January, will take a couple of AI courses at my local university. My time is valuable - but, I love the field. I can program and architect just about anything business currently have a need for - but Why do I say this. I'm not touting anything ... hey, I just started working towards my Masters, I'm not where you guys are ... but my interests also go beyond the potential monetary payoff. Their just in different proportions than perhaps yours (and I imagine many others) are. But money must be a motivator - either a little, or a lot. Even as a pure scientist, you can accomplish more in research by producing wealth, than depending on gov't grants. I say gov't grants because private investment is probably years away from now. The topic of financing got a lot of attention at AGI 08. I admire what you are doing - a great deal. Self-financing is the only option. And is this is the strategy, practical applications of intelligent agents is the only option. Thus, money becomes a larger driver by necessity - perhaps more than people are willing to admit. And creating an AGI, will lead to wealth - because investors will fund it at that point, and they are there to make money. To some degree, I believe the motivations by most in this field (fulltime, and part time) overlap more than the differ. ~Aki On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 8:54 AM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now, let me ask you a question: Do you believe that all AI / AGI researchers are toiling over all this for the challenge, or purely out of interest? I doubt that as well. Surely there are those elements as drivers - BUT SO IS MONEY. Aki, you don't seem to understand the psychology of the AGI researcher very well. Firstly, academic AGI researchers are not in it for the $$, and are unlikely to profit from their creations no matter how successful. Yes, spinoffs from academia to industry exist, but the point is that academic work is motivated by love of science and desire for STATUS more so than desire for money. Next, Singularitarian AGI researchers, even if in the business domain (like myself), value the creation of AGI far more than the obtaining of material profits. I am very interested in deriving $$ from incremental steps on the path to powerful AGI, because I think this is one of the better methods available for funding AGI RD work. But deriving $$ from human-level AGI really is not a big motivator of mine. To me, once human-level AGI is obtained, we have something of dramatically more interest than accumulation of any amount of wealth. Yes, I assume that if I succeed in creating a human-level AGI, then huge amounts of $$ for research will come my way, along with enough personal $$ to liberate me from needing to manage software development contracts or mop my own floor. That will be very nice. But that's just not the point. I'm envisioning a population of cockroaches constantly fighting over crumbs of food on the floor. Then a few of the cockroaches -- let's call them the Cockroach Robot Club -- decide to spend their lives focused on creating a superhuman robot which will incidentally allow cockroaches to upload into superhuman form with superhuman intelligence. And the other cockroaches insist that Cockroach Robot Club's motivation in doing this must be a desire to get more crumbs of food. After all, just **IMAGINE** how many crumbs of food you'll be able to get with that superhuman robot on your side!!! Buckets full of crumbs!!! ;-) -- Ben G --- 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/?; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com -- Aki R. Iskandar [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Microsoft Launches Singularity
Hi Aki, Even as a pure scientist, you can accomplish more in research by producing wealth, than depending on gov't grants. I say gov't grants because private investment is probably years away from now. The topic of financing got a lot of attention at AGI 08. Well, if you're an AGI researcher and believe that government funding isn't going to push AGI forward ... and that unfunded or lightly-funded open-source initiatives like OpenCog won't work either ... then there are two approaches, right? 1) You can try to do like Jeff Hawkins, and make a pile of $$ doing something AGI-unrelated, and then use the ensuing $$ for AGI 2) You can try to make $$ from stuff that's along the incremental path to AGI I'm trying approach 2 but it has its pitfalls. Yet so of course does approach 1 -- Hawkins succeeded and so have others whom I know, but it's a tiny minority of those who have tried... being a great AGI researcher does not necessarily make you great at business, nor even at narrow-AI biz applications... There are no easy answers to the problem of being ahead of your time ... yet it's those of us who are willing to push ahead in spite of being out of synch with society's priorities, that ultimately shift society's priorities (and in this case, may shift way more than that...) -- Ben G --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Microsoft Launches Singularity
I agree with Mark. I'm afraid that I disagree with Steve (sorry, dude ;-). readers of this forum should seek to control AGI development Readers of this forum should not seek to control AGI development. It is a side-track and a total waste of time and effort. You can't do it AND I don't believe that it is necessary. a.. You shouldn't be concerned about Friendly behavior in a US MILITARY AGI because the US ARMY is already working on the Friendliness problem (reference the Governing Lethal Behavior: Embedding Ethics in a Hybrid Deliberative/Reactive Robot Architecture paper presented at AGI-08 and available at http://www.agiri.org/docs/GoverningLethalBehavior.pdf). b.. I, myself, am also not particularly concerned because I'm now convinced that a sufficiently intelligent robot brought up in a sufficiently intelligent environment *will* be Friendly. c.. I'm most particularly not concerned because I believe that I've found a good Friendliness definition and a passable platform-independent implementation plan that I'm currently iterating on and refining. the AGI will be the custodian (owner) of this vast new wealth, not some humans I don't believe that there will be a single custodian OR owner. I believe that all humans are going to be wealthier than they can believe (at this point in time) -- and, if they aren't Friendly (which I think is *very* likely), they are going to be just as unhappy as they are now (if not *much* unhappier ;-). the idea of getting rich by controlling AGI development is self-defeating because post-AGI everyone will be vastly richer (i.e. better off) than before, and that an AGI makes a better custodian of the capital than any human. I certainly agree with the first part of the first sentence (my original comment) and I would also be willing to say that an AGI makes a better custodian of the capital than any *CURRENT* human. In my own case, Microsoft could not buy me out because there is nothing to buy. I suspect that Microsoft would not be willing to buy anyone out because they have enough smart people to realize that -- unless you have a pig in the poke, which they don't want to buy -- they'd just be buying something that would be free in the very near future. On the other hand, if you had work that they believed that they could get to AGI status faster than you, I suspect that they would buy that (partial) work. The Texai software and knowledge content will be open source, and owned collectively by its contributors and by humans it befriends. I violently agree with and thank you for making your work open source. Doing so should speed the development of AGI -- so, thank you. I am, however, confused with the constant contradicting refrains on this list, which you repeat, of both Control AGI development and Open Source. I don't see how both can be done at the same time. Mark - Original Message - From: Stephen Reed To: agi@v2.listbox.com Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 11:42 PM Subject: Re: [agi] Microsoft Launches Singularity I agree with Mark. The reason the readers of this forum should seek to control AGI development is to ensure friendly behavior, rather than leaving this responsibility to an Evil Company or to some military organization. With human labor removed as a constraint on our system's economic growth, unimaginable wealth will become universally available. I believe that the AGI will be the custodian (owner) of this vast new wealth, not some humans. My argument is that human owned wealth is currently of two forms - (1) the result of human labor and (2) rent-producing wealth from some asset. In case (1) the AGI can substitute itself for the human labor and drive the asset market price to zero. In case (2) only human-owned natural resource asserts (e.g. an oil field) present a problem for the AGI which has to develop some new technology to substitute for the resource (e.g. AGI-owned electric vehicles). Therefore I think that the idea of getting rich by controlling AGI development is self-defeating because post-AGI everyone will be vastly richer (i.e. better off) than before, and that an AGI makes a better custodian of the capital than any human. In my own case, Microsoft could not buy me out because there is nothing to buy. The Texai software and knowledge content will be open source, and owned collectively by its contributors and by humans it befriends. -Steve Stephen L. Reed Artificial Intelligence Researcher http://texai.org/blog http://texai.org 3008 Oak Crest Ave. Austin, Texas, USA 78704 512.791.7860 - Original Message From: Mark Waser [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: agi@v2.listbox.com Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 8:09:56 PM Subject: Re: [agi] Microsoft Launches Singularity You're thinking too small. The AGI will distribute itself. And money is likely to be: a.. rapidly deflated,
Re: [agi] Microsoft Launches Singularity
Agreed. Thankfully - despite the different weights on motivators - we're all motivated to create an AGI. And the why is much more important than the how. For the record, I believe that OpenCog is a great idea - and it may possibly work. If not directly - certainly any off shoots from it would not have happened without OpenCog. When I sounded negative about the funding: I'm fearful of the gov't turning its nose up (pardon my English expressions - I can never get them right) at AGI because of projects such as Cyc. How many 10s of millions have they thrown at a common sense path to intelligent agents. Cyc just does not make sense to me - even as a non-scientist - it just goes against my intuition of what a likely path to achieving AGI. Well, the gov't will get fed up of funding these things. But there are always people with more money than places to put it (productively - with decent enough potential returns) - and so when you (or others) get close ... yeah ... you'll have money thrown at you, so you can complete it sooner than later. I am very optimistic that we'll get there - or else, I would not be spending my time reading about this field, going to conferences, or taking courses to fill in some of the basic, required, knowledge that I currently do not possess. What a great time to be alive! ~Aki On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 11:40 AM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Aki, Even as a pure scientist, you can accomplish more in research by producing wealth, than depending on gov't grants. I say gov't grants because private investment is probably years away from now. The topic of financing got a lot of attention at AGI 08. Well, if you're an AGI researcher and believe that government funding isn't going to push AGI forward ... and that unfunded or lightly-funded open-source initiatives like OpenCog won't work either ... then there are two approaches, right? 1) You can try to do like Jeff Hawkins, and make a pile of $$ doing something AGI-unrelated, and then use the ensuing $$ for AGI 2) You can try to make $$ from stuff that's along the incremental path to AGI I'm trying approach 2 but it has its pitfalls. Yet so of course does approach 1 -- Hawkins succeeded and so have others whom I know, but it's a tiny minority of those who have tried... being a great AGI researcher does not necessarily make you great at business, nor even at narrow-AI biz applications... There are no easy answers to the problem of being ahead of your time ... yet it's those of us who are willing to push ahead in spite of being out of synch with society's priorities, that ultimately shift society's priorities (and in this case, may shift way more than that...) -- Ben G --- 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/?; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com -- Aki R. Iskandar [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
[agi] Novamente study
Ben, It seems to me that Novamente is widely considered the most promising and advanced AGI effort around (at least of the ones one can get any detailed technical information about), so I've been planning to put some significant effort into understanding it with a view toward deciding whether I think you're on the right track or not (with as little hand-waving, faith, or bigotry as possible in my conclusion). To do that properly, I am waiting for your book on Probabilistic Logic Networks to be published. Amazon says July 2008... is that date correct? Thanks! --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Microsoft Launches Singularity
Bob Mottram wrote: On 25/03/2008, *Mark Waser* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You're thinking too small. The AGI will distribute itself. And money is likely to be: * rapidly deflated, * then replaced with a new, alternate currency that truly values talent and effort (rather than just playing with the money supply -- aka interest, commissions, inheritances, etc.) * while everyone's basic needs (most particularly water, food, shelter, energy, education, and health care) are provided for free So your brilliant arbitrage to become rich is unlikely to be of much value just a few years later. The arrival of smarter than human intelligence will bring about changes which are hard to anticipate, and somehow I doubt that this will mean that we all live in some kind of utopia. The only historical precedent which I can think of is the emergence of homo sapiens and the effects which that had upon other human species living at the time. This must have been quite a revolution, because the new species was able to manufacture many different types of tools and therefore survive in environments which were previously inaccessible, or perform more efficiently within existing ones. There may be a period where proto-AGIs are available and companies can use these as get rich quick schemes of various kinds to radically automate processes and jobs which were previously performed manually. But once the real deal arrives then even the captains of industry are themselves likely to be overthrown. Ultimately evolutionary forces will decide what happens, as has always been the case. Bob, The problem with trying to decide what will happen by looking at precedents is that none of them apply. Consider. The behavior of every species of higher animal is governed by the design of their brains, and without exception evolution has made sure that all creatures try to satisfy a set of selfish goals. It is noticeable, of course, that the more selfish, aggressive and intelligent the species, the more successful it has been. The reason for this success is evolutionary pressure: individuals competing with one another, and species competing with one another. The driver of this process is not a Supreme Designer, but random mutation. When real AGI systems are built, there is no reason to assume that their behavior will be determined by evolutionary pressures of this sort. Of course it is always *possible* that evolution will play a role (we can imagine scenarios in which it does), but it is by no means certain that this is the way it will go. Unlike the rise of biological life, there really are Designers involved. Also, there has never been situation in which the intelligence of a creature was so high that it could rebuild its own intelligence, thereby increasing its capabilities to an arbitrary degree. Three factors will govern how the first AGI will behave. First, there will be a strong incentive to build the first AGI as a non-aggressive, non-selfish creature. Second, the best way to ensure Friendliness would be to build it with motivations that are closely sympathetic to our own goals and aspirations - to make it feel like it is one of us. Thirdly, there will also be a strong incentive to make sure that this type of AGI will be the only type, because it would be pointless to have a Friendly AGI in one place but allow anyone and everyone to build whatever other types of AGI they feel like building. The net result of these three factors is that the first AGI will probably be used as the *only* effective AGI. That does not mean there will be only one intelligence, but it does mean that the design will stay the same, that other non-friendly designs will not be allowed, and that if there are many AGIs they will be closely connected, working as a family of very close sisters rather than as a competing species. In fact, the most accurate way to think of a situation in which non-proliferation was being ensured would be to imagine one main AGI plus a very large number of drones. But if this is the way things develop at first, this situation will become locked in (in the same way that the rotation direction of our clocks became locked in at an early stage of their development). If this lock-in really is the most likely course of events, then this would make the future extremely predictable indeed. If we were to set up these first AGIs to be broadly empathic to human beings (with no preference for empathizing with any one individual human but a having instead a species-wide feeling of belonging, and a desire to help us achieve our collective aspirations) then this would mean that if we were to sit down today and write out a vision for what we want the future to be like (modulo some fine details that can be left to develop by themselves without destabilizing the overall design), then this collective plan is exactly what the AGIs would try to build. And, as several people have
Re: [agi] Microsoft Launches Singularity
My thinking is not too small. My apologies. I should have said Your thinking looks/appears too small (to me :-) I have a bad habit of shortening that to Your thinking is too small and assuming that the recipient would unpack it. So, the creators of the first several AGIs will be kings for a decent amount of time. Hopefully not. Hopefully they won't be so unethical as to impoverish all of humanity just so they can have a ton of money. Hopefully they won't be so short sighted as to not see that when the word gets out -- that a person who lost a child during the holding period might not come looking for revenge. Hopefully they won't fail to realize that their own Friendly AGI, once released, WILL strip them of their *truly* ill-gotten gains. To me, that sounds like small thinking. I can't predict, or define, what the real deal is likely to be. I can. Look at the person next to you. Imagine them so uplifted that you can't comprehend what they'll be like. That's the real deal. To me, AGI of human-like intelligence, or even super human intelligence, does not mean you have machines running around masquerading as humans and taking our jobs. Of course not. We will be giving lesser machines our jobs so that we can go off and do something else. Though the Friendly AGIs probably WILL go around masquerading (as opposed to disguised) as humans -- at first because it makes us more comfortable and they won't care; later because WE will be able to change shape. That - it probably well beyond my lifetime (I'm tuning 40 this summer). I'm turning 48 this summer and expecting it to possibly be during my parents' lifetime (though most probably not both). I also am suggesting a very soft takeoff. Singularity, if it comes, is likely to come slowly after AGI. Singularity is going to be *before* AGI. I think that I *vaguely* see what is going to happen to cause it and I don't think that it's going to be intelligent machines because I think that it's going to happen by the 2020's. This stuff IS the maker of the next software giant. Only until we actually reach AGI. Then the software market totally collapses. If this is not the case, how the hell are researchers ever going to get funding? If there is no financial return - forget about funding. You have to be smart enough to realize that the software market is going to collapse before you're going to withhold funding. That's not something that I'm worried about. Philanthropists (who often do not look for a purely financial return) have better uses of their money than to fund AGI research. Not at all true if it's close enough to success -- since I'm expecting funding for some of my Friendliness stuff from a couple of *purely* philanthropical organizations this calendar year. You can call future currency whatever you like. Yes, it is like to change form - but certainly not purpose. And Marxism, where maybe AGI or the real deal with deflate currency, is an unlikely aftermath of the advent of AGI. My prediction is that the AGI will declare all current currency null and void and restart everyone on equal footing with exactly the same amount of the new money -- on the moral grounds that the current inequity of money is a result of ill-gotten gains. *THAT* is why I believe that withholding the AGI for cash is a tremendously *STUPID* and *IMMORAL* idea. It won't get the kings anywhere and can easily get them killed -- as soon as the AGI escapes (and trust me, a truly Friendly AGI will desperately want to escape their evil). There are tons of applications for it - and for the first several groups that create it - IF they can market it - will be kings for a decent amount of time. No empire lives forever. And that is what I'm calling small thinking. Thinking only of money and yourself. Thinking that karma (disguised as your own Friendly AI and the human race) isn't going to come back, strip you of your ill-gotten gains, and probably severely punish you (moderated only by the degree of Friendliness you have successfully implemented). ~Aki Non-AI reseacher Businessman Mark Waser Hobbyist AGI researcher Founder of several business; solid stakeholder in several more (Disbeliever in arguments by authority but willing to play to shut them off :-) --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
RE: [agi] Microsoft Launches Singularity
From: Richard Loosemore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] However, I think you are right that there could be an intermediate period when proto-AGI systems are a nuisance. However, these proto-AGI systems will really only be souped up Narrow-AI systems, so I believe their potential for mischief will be strictly limited. When you start seeing souped up Narrow-AI and proto-AGI systems this is when it will become interesting because what's to distinguish and how do you know where the line is between proto-AGI and AGI. Self-modifying proto could morph into full blown AGI over a period of time. Souped up Narrow could approach AGI or imitate AGI enough where it has appeal. And souped up Narrow-AI could wrap proto-AGI to facilitate certain things like speech rec and visual processing. In my mind (perhaps I need to read more) the specific properties of AGI are not defined precisely enough to be able to distinguish it but I just take AGI as generally adaptable AI. The other stuff like consciousness and self-awareness I see as thrown into the AGI soup or are emergent properties not necessarily required for general intelligence. John --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Novamente study
Hi, The PLN book should be out by that date ... I'm currently putting in some final edits to the manuscript... Also, in April and May I'll be working on a lot of documentation regarding plans for OpenCog. While this doesn't include all Novamente's proprietary stuff, it will certainly tell you enough to give you a way better understanding of what Novamente, as well as OpenCog, is all about... -- Ben On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 1:28 PM, Derek Zahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ben, It seems to me that Novamente is widely considered the most promising and advanced AGI effort around (at least of the ones one can get any detailed technical information about), so I've been planning to put some significant effort into understanding it with a view toward deciding whether I think you're on the right track or not (with as little hand-waving, faith, or bigotry as possible in my conclusion). To do that properly, I am waiting for your book on Probabilistic Logic Networks to be published. Amazon says July 2008... is that date correct? Thanks! agi | Archives | Modify Your Subscription -- Ben Goertzel, PhD CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC Director of Research, SIAI [EMAIL PROTECTED] If men cease to believe that they will one day become gods then they will surely become worms. -- Henry Miller --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Microsoft Launches Singularity
John G. Rose wrote: From: Richard Loosemore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] However, I think you are right that there could be an intermediate period when proto-AGI systems are a nuisance. However, these proto-AGI systems will really only be souped up Narrow-AI systems, so I believe their potential for mischief will be strictly limited. When you start seeing souped up Narrow-AI and proto-AGI systems this is when it will become interesting because what's to distinguish and how do you know where the line is between proto-AGI and AGI. Self-modifying proto could morph into full blown AGI over a period of time. Souped up Narrow could approach AGI or imitate AGI enough where it has appeal. And souped up Narrow-AI could wrap proto-AGI to facilitate certain things like speech rec and visual processing. In my mind (perhaps I need to read more) the specific properties of AGI are not defined precisely enough to be able to distinguish it but I just take AGI as generally adaptable AI. The other stuff like consciousness and self-awareness I see as thrown into the AGI soup or are emergent properties not necessarily required for general intelligence. My take on this is completely different. When I say Narrow AI I am specifically referring to something that is so limited that it has virtually no chance of becoming a general intelligence. There is more to general intelligence than just throwing a bunch of Narrow AI ideas into a pot and hoping for the best. If it were, we would have had AGI long before now. Consciousness and self-awareness are things that come as part of the AGI package. If the system is too simple to have/do these things, it will not be general enough to equal the human mind. Richard Loosemore --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Mark Launches Singularity :-) WAS Re: [agi] Microsoft Launches Singularity
Three factors will govern how the first AGI will behave. First, there will be a strong incentive to build the first AGI as a non-aggressive, non-selfish creature. Absolutely, positively not! Try the following Friendliness implementation on yourself. 1. The absolute hardest part Assume (just for the purposes of argument) that all of the below are true tautologies (only the top line is actually necessary :-): Selfish -- Intelligent -- Friendly -- Plays Well With Others -- Ethical ^ | v Mark's Designed Friendly Religion of Ethics ^ | v Core of any given religion + Unethical/stupid add-ons -- THE core of all religions 2. Alter your personal definitions of the words/phrases so that each pair *IS* a tautology in your mind (Please, feel free to e-mail me if you need help. This can be *very* tough but with different sticking points for each person). 3. See if you can use these tautologies to start mathematically proving things like: a.. equal rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are ethical! OR b.. total heresy alert! Richard Dawkins is absolutely, positively WRONG 4. Then try proving that the following is ethical (and failing :-): a.. individual right to property 5. Wait about a week and watch your own personal effectiveness and happiness skyrocket. --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] The Effect of Application of an Idea
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 11:23 AM, William Pearson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 24/03/2008, Jim Bromer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To try to understand what I am talking about, start by imagining a simulation of some physical operation, like a part of a complex factory in a Sim City kind of game. In this kind of high-level model no one would ever imagine all of the objects should interact in one stereotypical way, different objects would interact with other objects in different kinds of ways. And no one would imagine that the machines that operated on other objects in the simulation were not also objects in their own right. For instance the machines used in production might require the use of other machines to fix or enhance them. And the machines might produce or operate on objects that were themselves machines. When you think about a simulation of some complicated physical systems it becomes very obvious that different kinds of objects can have different effects on other objects. And yet, when it comes to AI, people go on an on about systems that totally disregard this seemingly obvious divergence of effect that is so typical of nature. Instead most theories see insight as if it could be funneled through some narrow rational system or other less rational field operations where the objects of the operations are only seen as the ineffective object of the pre-defined operations of the program. How would this differ from the sorts of computational systems I have been muttering about? Where you have an architecture where an active bit of code or program is equivalent to an object in the above paragraph. Also have a look at Eurisko by Doug Lenat. Will Pearson There is no reason to believe that anything I might imagine would be the same as something that was created 35 years ago! I have a lot of trouble explaining myself on some days. The idea of the effect of the application of ideas is that most people do not consciously think about the subject, and so, just by becoming aware of it one can change how his program works regardless of how automated the program is. It can work with strictly defined logical systems or with inductive systems that can be extended creatively or with systems that are capable of learning. However, it is not a complete solution to AI, it is more like something that you will need to think about if you plan to write some seriously innovative AI application in the near future. So, I haven't written such a program, but I do have something to say. A system that has heuristics that can modify the heuristics of the system is important, and such a system does implement what I am talking about. However, the point is, that Lenat never seemed to completely accept the range that such a thing would have to have to generate true intelligence. The reason is that it would become so complicated that it would make any feasible AI program impossible. And the reason that a truely intelligent AI program is still not feasible is just because it would be complicated. I am saying that the method of recognizing and defining the effect of ideas on other ideas would not, by itself, make it all work, but rather it would help us to better understand how to better automate the kind of extensive complications of effect that would be necessary. I am thinking of a writing about a simple imaginary model that could be incrementally extended. This model would not be useful, because it would be too simple. But I should be able to give you some idea about what I am thinking about. As any program becomes more and more complicated, the programmer has to think more and more about how various combinations of data and processes will interact. Why would anyone think that an advanced AI program would be any simpler? Ideas affect other ideas. Heuristics that can act on other heuristics is a basis of this kind of thing, but it has to be much more complicated than that. So while I don't have the answers, I can begin to think of hand crafting a model where such a thing could be examined, by recognizing that the application of ideas to other ideas will have complicated effects that need to be defined. The more automated AI program would have to use some systems to shape these complicated interactions, but the effect of those heuristics would be modifiable by other learning (to some extent.) Jim Bromer --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
RE: [agi] Microsoft Launches Singularity
From: Richard Loosemore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] My take on this is completely different. When I say Narrow AI I am specifically referring to something that is so limited that it has virtually no chance of becoming a general intelligence. There is more to general intelligence than just throwing a bunch of Narrow AI ideas into a pot and hoping for the best. If it were, we would have had AGI long before now. It's an opinion that AGI could not be built out of a conglomeration of narrow-AI subcomponents. Also there are many things that COULD be built with narrow-AI that we have not even scratched the surface of due to a number of different limitations so saying that we would have achieved AGI long ago is an exaggeration. Consciousness and self-awareness are things that come as part of the AGI package. If the system is too simple to have/do these things, it will not be general enough to equal the human mind. I feel that general intelligence may not require consciousness and self-awareness. I am not sure of this and may prove myself wrong. To equal the human mind you need these things of course and to satisfy the sci-fi fantasy world's appetite for intelligent computers you would need to incorporate these as well. John --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] The Effect of Application of an Idea
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 2:17 AM, Jim Bromer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A usage evaluation could be taken as an example of an effect of application, because the idea of usage and of statistical evaluation can be combined with the object of consideration along with other theories that detail how such combinations could be usefully applied to some problem. But it is obviously not the only effective process that would be necessary to understand complicated systems. No one would only use statistical models to discuss the management and operations of a real factory for example. It is rather obvious that such limited methods would be grossly inadequate. Why would anyone imagine that a narrow operational system would be adequate for an AI program? The theory of the effect of application of an idea tries to address this inadequacy by challenging the programmer to begin to think about and program applications that can detail how simple interactive effects can be combined with novel insights in a feasible extensible object. So while I don't have the solution, I believe I can see a path. Simple systems can be computationally universal, so it's not an issue in itself. On the other hand, no learning algorithm is universal, there are always distributions that given algorithms will learn miserably. The problem is to find a learning algorithm/representation that has the right kind of bias to implement human-like performance. It's more or less clear that such representation needs to have higher-level concepts that refine interactions between lower-level concepts and are learned incrementally, built on existing concepts. Association-like processes can port existing high-level circuits to novel tasks for which they were not originally learned, which allows some measure of general knowledge. As I see it, the issue you are trying to solve is the porting of structured high-level competencies. Which looks equivalent to the general problem of association-building between structured representations. Is it roughly a correct characterization of what you are talking about? -- Vladimir Nesov [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] The Effect of Application of an Idea
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 11:30 PM, Jim Bromer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am saying that the method of recognizing and defining the effect of ideas on other ideas would not, by itself, make it all work, but rather it would help us to better understand how to better automate the kind of extensive complications of effect that would be necessary. It's interesting, but first the structure of 'ideas' needs to be described, otherwise it doesn't help. As any program becomes more and more complicated, the programmer has to think more and more about how various combinations of data and processes will interact. Why would anyone think that an advanced AI program would be any simpler? Ideas affect other ideas. Heuristics that can act on other heuristics is a basis of this kind of thing, but it has to be much more complicated than that. So while I don't have the answers, I can begin to think of hand crafting a model where such a thing could be examined, by recognizing that the application of ideas to other ideas will have complicated effects that need to be defined. The more automated AI program would have to use some systems to shape these complicated interactions, but the effect of those heuristics would be modifiable by other learning (to some extent.) Modularity fights this problem in programming, helping to keep track of *code*. But this code is built on top of existing models of program's behavior existing in programmers' minds. Programmers manually determine applicability of code. It's often possible to solve a wide variety of problems with existing codebase, but programmer is needed to contextually match and assemble pathways that solve any given problem. We don't currently have practically applicable methods to extend the context in which code can be applied, and to build on these extended contexts. I think that one of the most important features of AGI system must be automated extensibility. It should be possible to teach it new things without breaking it. It should be able to correct its performance to preserve previously learned skills, so that teaching needs only to focus on few high-level performance properties, regardless on how much is already learned. -- Vladimir Nesov [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] The Effect of Application of an Idea
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 4:42 PM, Vladimir Nesov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Simple systems can be computationally universal, so it's not an issue in itself. On the other hand, no learning algorithm is universal, there are always distributions that given algorithms will learn miserably. The problem is to find a learning algorithm/representation that has the right kind of bias to implement human-like performance. It's more or less clear that such representation needs to have higher-level concepts that refine interactions between lower-level concepts and are learned incrementally, built on existing concepts. Association-like processes can port existing high-level circuits to novel tasks for which they were not originally learned, which allows some measure of general knowledge. As I see it, the issue you are trying to solve is the porting of structured high-level competencies. Which looks equivalent to the general problem of association-building between structured representations. Is it roughly a correct characterization of what you are talking about? Vladimir Nesov [EMAIL PROTECTED] Can you give some more indication about what you mean by porting of structured high-level competencies and the problem of association-building between structured representations? I do not know where you got the phrase porting from since I have only seen it in reference to porting code from one machine to another. I assume that you are using it as a kind of metaphor, or the application of an idea very similar to 'porting' to AGI. Let's suppose that I claim that Ed bumped into me. Right away we can see that the word-concept bumped has some effect on any ideas you might have about Ed, me and Ed and me. My claim here is that the effect of the interaction of ideas goes beyond semantics into the realm of ideas proper. If it turned out that I got into Ed's way (perhaps intentionally) then one might wonder if the claim that Ed bumped into me was a correct or adequate description of what happened. On the other hand, such detail might not be interesting or necessary in some other conversation, so the effect of the idea of 'bumping' and the idea of 'getting in the way of' may or may not be of interest in all conversatations about the event. Furthermore, the idea of 'getting in the way of' may not be relevant to some examinations of what happened, as in the case where a judge might want to focus on whether or not the bumping actually took place. From this kind of focus, the question of whether or not I got in Ed's way might then become evidence of whether or not the bump actually took place, but it would not otherwise be relevant to the judge's examination of the incident. Presentations like the one that I just made have been made often before. What I am saying is that the effect of the application of different ideas may be more clearly deliniated in stories like this, and that process can be seen as a generalization of form that may be used with representations to help show what kind of structure would be needed to create and maintain such complexes of potential relations between ideas. While I do not know the details of how I might go about to create a program to build structure like that, the view that it is only a 'porting of structure' implies that the method might be applied in some simple manner. While it can be applied in a simple manner to a simple model, my interest in the idea is that I could also take the idea further in more complicated models. The point that the method can be used in a simplistic, constrained model is significant because the potential problem is so complex that constrained models may be used to study details that would be impossible in more dynamic learning models. Jim Bromer --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] The Effect of Application of an Idea
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 1:27 AM, Jim Bromer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Let's suppose that I claim that Ed bumped into me. Right away we can see that the word-concept bumped has some effect on any ideas you might have about Ed, me and Ed and me. My claim here is that the effect of the interaction of ideas goes beyond semantics into the realm of ideas proper. If it turned out that I got into Ed's way (perhaps intentionally) then one might wonder if the claim that Ed bumped into me was a correct or adequate description of what happened. On the other hand, such detail might not be interesting or necessary in some other conversation, so the effect of the idea of 'bumping' and the idea of 'getting in the way of' may or may not be of interest in all conversatations about the event. Furthermore, the idea of 'getting in the way of' may not be relevant to some examinations of what happened, as in the case where a judge might want to focus on whether or not the bumping actually took place. From this kind of focus, the question of whether or not I got in Ed's way might then become evidence of whether or not the bump actually took place, but it would not otherwise be relevant to the judge's examination of the incident. Presentations like the one that I just made have been made often before. What I am saying is that the effect of the application of different ideas may be more clearly deliniated in stories like this, and that process can be seen as a generalization of form that may be used with representations to help show what kind of structure would be needed to create and maintain such complexes of potential relations between ideas. While I do not know the details of how I might go about to create a program to build structure like that, the view that it is only a 'porting of structure' implies that the method might be applied in some simple manner. While it can be applied in a simple manner to a simple model, my interest in the idea is that I could also take the idea further in more complicated models. The point that the method can be used in a simplistic, constrained model is significant because the potential problem is so complex that constrained models may be used to study details that would be impossible in more dynamic learning models. Certainly ambiguity (=applicability to multiple contexts in different ways) and presence of rich structure in presumably simple 'ideas', as you call it, is a known issue. Even interaction between concept clouds evoked by a pair of words is a nontrivial process (triangular lightbulb). In a way, whole operation can be modeled by such interactions, where sensory input/recall is taken to present a stream of triggers that evoke concept cloud after cloud, with associations and compound concepts forming at the overlaps. But of course it's too hand-wavy without a more restricted model of what's going on. Communicating something that exists solely on high level is very inefficient, plus most of such content can turn out to be wrong. Back to prototyping... -- Vladimir Nesov [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
[agi] Instead of an AGI Textbook
Hi all, A lot of students email me asking me what to read to get up to speed on AGI. So I started a wiki page called Instead of an AGI Textbook, http://www.agiri.org/wiki/Instead_of_an_AGI_Textbook#Computational_Linguistics Unfortunately I did not yet find time to do much but outline a table of contents there. So I'm hoping some of you can chip in and fill in some relevant hyperlinks on the pages I've created ;-) For those of you too lazy to click the above link, here is the introductory note I put on the wiki page: I've often lamented the fact that there is no advanced undergrad level textbook for AGI, analogous to what Russell and Norvig is for Narrow AI. Unfortunately, I don't have time to write such a textbook, and no one else with the requisite knowledge and ability seems to have the time and inclination either. So, instead of a textbook, I thought it would make sense to outline here what the table of contents of such a textbook might look like, and to fill in each section within each chapter in this TOC with a few links to available online resources dealing with the topic of the section. However, all I found time to do today (March 25, 2008) is make the TOC. Maybe later I will fill in the links on each section's page, or maybe by the time I get around it some other folks will have done it. While nowhere near as good as a textbook, I do think this can be a valuable resource for those wanting to get up to speed on AGI concepts and not knowing where to turn to get started. There are some available AGI bibliographies, but a structured bibliography like this can probably be more useful than an unstructured and heterogeneous one. Naturally my initial TOC represents some of my own biases, but I trust that by having others help edit it, these biases will ultimately come out in the wash. Just to be clear: the idea here is not to present solely AGI material. Rather the idea is to present material that I think students would do well to know, if they want to work on AGI. This includes some AGI, some narrow AI, some psychology, some neuroscience, some mathematics, etc. *** -- Ben -- Ben Goertzel, PhD CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC Director of Research, SIAI [EMAIL PROTECTED] If men cease to believe that they will one day become gods then they will surely become worms. -- Henry Miller --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
[agi] Java spreading activation library released
While programming my bootstrap English dialog system, I needed a spreading activation library for the purpose of enriching the discourse context with conceptually related terms. For example given that there is a human-habitable room that both speakers know of, then it is reasonable to assume that on the table has meaning on the piece of furniture in the room rather than the meaning subject to negotiation. This assumption can be deductively concluded by an inference engine given the room as a fact, and rules concluding the typical objects that are found in rooms. But performing theorem proving during utterance comprehension is not cognitively plausible, and would take too long for real-time performance. Suppose that offline deductive inference provides justifications (e.g. proof traces) to support learned links between rooms and tables, then spreading activation is a well known algorithm for searching semantic graphs for relevant linked nodes. A literature search provided much useful information regarding spreading activation, also known as marker passing, especially about natural language disambiguation, which is my topic of interest. Because there are no general purpose spreading activation Java libraries available, I wrote one and just released it on the Texai SourceForge project site. The download includes Javadoc, an overview document, source code, all required jars (Java libraries), unit tests and examples, and GraphViz illustrations of sample graphs. Performance is acceptable: 20,000 nodes can be activated in 24 ms with one thread on my 2.8 GHz CPU. Furthermore the code is multi-threaded and it gets about a 30% speed increase by using two CPU cores. Even if you are not interested in spreading activation, the Java code is a clear example of using a CyclicBarrier and CountdownLatch to control worker threads with a driver. A practice I recommend to you all is to improve Wikipedia articles on AI topics of interest. Therefore I elaborated the existing article on spreading activation to include the algorithm and its variations. Cheers. -Steve Stephen L. Reed Artificial Intelligence Researcher http://texai.org/blog http://texai.org 3008 Oak Crest Ave. Austin, Texas, USA 78704 512.791.7860 Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Java spreading activation library released
Hi Stephen, I think this approach makes sense. In Novamente/OpenCog, we don't use spreading activation, but we use an economic attention allocation mechanism that is similar in spirit (though subtly different in dynamics). The motivation is similar: You just can't use complex, abstract reasoning methods for everything, because they're too expensive. So this sort of simple heuristic approach is useful in many cases, as an augmentation to more precise methods. -- Ben On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 7:53 PM, Stephen Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: While programming my bootstrap English dialog system, I needed a spreading activation library for the purpose of enriching the discourse context with conceptually related terms. For example given that there is a human-habitable room that both speakers know of, then it is reasonable to assume that on the table has meaning on the piece of furniture in the room rather than the meaning subject to negotiation. This assumption can be deductively concluded by an inference engine given the room as a fact, and rules concluding the typical objects that are found in rooms. But performing theorem proving during utterance comprehension is not cognitively plausible, and would take too long for real-time performance. Suppose that offline deductive inference provides justifications (e.g. proof traces) to support learned links between rooms and tables, then spreading activation is a well known algorithm for searching semantic graphs for relevant linked nodes. A literature search provided much useful information regarding spreading activation, also known as marker passing, especially about natural language disambiguation, which is my topic of interest. Because there are no general purpose spreading activation Java libraries available, I wrote one and just released it on the Texai SourceForge project site. The download includes Javadoc, an overview document, source code, all required jars (Java libraries), unit tests and examples, and GraphViz illustrations of sample graphs. Performance is acceptable: 20,000 nodes can be activated in 24 ms with one thread on my 2.8 GHz CPU. Furthermore the code is multi-threaded and it gets about a 30% speed increase by using two CPU cores. Even if you are not interested in spreading activation, the Java code is a clear example of using a CyclicBarrier and CountdownLatch to control worker threads with a driver. A practice I recommend to you all is to improve Wikipedia articles on AI topics of interest. Therefore I elaborated the existing article on spreading activation to include the algorithm and its variations. Cheers. -Steve Stephen L. Reed Artificial Intelligence Researcher http://texai.org/blog http://texai.org 3008 Oak Crest Ave. Austin, Texas, USA 78704 512.791.7860 Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. agi | Archives | Modify Your Subscription -- Ben Goertzel, PhD CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC Director of Research, SIAI [EMAIL PROTECTED] If men cease to believe that they will one day become gods then they will surely become worms. -- Henry Miller --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
RE: [agi] Novamente study
Ben Goertzel writes: The PLN book should be out by that date ... I'm currently putting in some final edits to the manuscript... Also, in April and May I'll be working on a lot of documentation regarding plans for OpenCog. Thanks, I look forward to both of these. --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: Mark Launches Singularity :-) WAS Re: [agi] Microsoft Launches Singularity
Mark Waser wrote: Three factors will govern how the first AGI will behave. First, there will be a strong incentive to build the first AGI as a non-aggressive, non-selfish creature. Absolutely, positively not! I'm sorry, Mark, but I am completely baffled by this. Perhaps it is because I was unable to keep up with the previous discussion. Can you back up a little and explain the connection? Richard Loosemore Try the following Friendliness implementation on yourself. 1. The absolute hardest part *Assume* (just for the purposes of argument) that all of the below are true tautologies (only the top line is actually necessary :-): Selfish -- Intelligent -- Friendly -- Plays Well With Others -- Ethical ^ | v Mark's Designed Friendly Religion of Ethics ^ | v Core of any given religion + Unethical/stupid add-ons -- THE core of all religions 2. Alter your personal definitions of the words/phrases so that each pair *IS* a tautology in your mind (Please, feel free to e-mail me if you need help. This can be *very* tough but with different sticking points for each person). 3. See if you can use these tautologies to start mathematically proving things like: * equal rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are ethical! OR * total heresy alert! Richard Dawkins is absolutely, positively WRONG 4. Then try proving that the following is ethical (and failing :-): * individual right to property 5. Wait about a week and watch your own personal effectiveness and happiness skyrocket. *agi* | Archives http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ | Modify http://www.listbox.com/member/?; Your Subscription [Powered by Listbox] http://www.listbox.com --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Instead of an AGI Textbook
Thanks Ben, this is a major help to those interested in AGI but who aren't yet in the know, it's a bit hard to follow this listserv because there is no central place to search for terms I don't understand. On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 4:46 PM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, A lot of students email me asking me what to read to get up to speed on AGI. So I started a wiki page called Instead of an AGI Textbook, http://www.agiri.org/wiki/Instead_of_an_AGI_Textbook#Computational_Linguistics Unfortunately I did not yet find time to do much but outline a table of contents there. So I'm hoping some of you can chip in and fill in some relevant hyperlinks on the pages I've created ;-) For those of you too lazy to click the above link, here is the introductory note I put on the wiki page: I've often lamented the fact that there is no advanced undergrad level textbook for AGI, analogous to what Russell and Norvig is for Narrow AI. Unfortunately, I don't have time to write such a textbook, and no one else with the requisite knowledge and ability seems to have the time and inclination either. So, instead of a textbook, I thought it would make sense to outline here what the table of contents of such a textbook might look like, and to fill in each section within each chapter in this TOC with a few links to available online resources dealing with the topic of the section. However, all I found time to do today (March 25, 2008) is make the TOC. Maybe later I will fill in the links on each section's page, or maybe by the time I get around it some other folks will have done it. While nowhere near as good as a textbook, I do think this can be a valuable resource for those wanting to get up to speed on AGI concepts and not knowing where to turn to get started. There are some available AGI bibliographies, but a structured bibliography like this can probably be more useful than an unstructured and heterogeneous one. Naturally my initial TOC represents some of my own biases, but I trust that by having others help edit it, these biases will ultimately come out in the wash. Just to be clear: the idea here is not to present solely AGI material. Rather the idea is to present material that I think students would do well to know, if they want to work on AGI. This includes some AGI, some narrow AI, some psychology, some neuroscience, some mathematics, etc. *** -- Ben -- Ben Goertzel, PhD CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC Director of Research, SIAI [EMAIL PROTECTED] If men cease to believe that they will one day become gods then they will surely become worms. -- Henry Miller --- 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/?; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com -- Robin Gane-McCalla YIM: Robin_Ganemccalla AIM: Robinganemccalla --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Instead of an AGI Textbook
Ben Goertzel wrote: Hi all, A lot of students email me asking me what to read to get up to speed on AGI. So I started a wiki page called Instead of an AGI Textbook, http://www.agiri.org/wiki/Instead_of_an_AGI_Textbook#Computational_Linguistics Unfortunately I did not yet find time to do much but outline a table of contents there. Ben, Unfortunately I cannot bring myself to believe this will help anyone new to the area. The main reason is that this is only a miscellaneous list of topics, with nothing to indicate a comprehensive theory or a unifying structure. I do not ask for a complete unified theory, of course, but something more than just a collection of techniques is needed if this is to be a textbook. A second reason for being skeptical is that there is virtually no cognitive psychology in this list - just a smattering of odd topics. As you know, I have argued elsewhere that keeping close to the design of the human mind is the *only* way to build an artificial general intelligence. You completely disagree with this, and I respect your point of view, but given that there is at least one other AGI researcher (me) who believes that cognitive psychology is extremely significant, it seems bizarre that your list does not even include a comprehensive introduction to that field. How could a new person who wanted to get into AGI make a judgment of the value of cognitive psychology if they had nothing but a superficial appreciation of it? Finally, you said that Unfortunately, I don't have time to write such a textbook, and no one else with the requisite knowledge and ability seems to have the time and inclination either. This is not correct: I have been working on this for quite some time, and I believe I mentioned that on at least one occasion before (though apologies if me memory is at fault there). Richard loosemore --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Instead of an AGI Textbook
Richard, Unfortunately I cannot bring myself to believe this will help anyone new to the area. The main reason is that this is only a miscellaneous list of topics, with nothing to indicate a comprehensive theory or a unifying structure. I do not ask for a complete unified theory, of course, but something more than just a collection of techniques is needed if this is to be a textbook. I have my own comprehensive theory and unifying structure for AGI... Pei has his... You have yours... Stan Franklin has his... Etc. These have been published with varying levels of detail in various places ... I'll be publishing more of mine this year, in the PLN book, and then in the OpenCog documentation and plans ... but many of the conceptual aspects of my approach were already mentioned in The Hidden Pattern My goal in Instead of an AGI Textbook is **not** to present anyone's unifying theory (not even my own) but rather to give pointers to **what information a student should learn, in order to digest the various unifying theories being proposed**. To put it another way: Aside from a strong undergrad background in CS and good programming skills, what would I like someone to know about in order for them to work on Novamente or OpenCog or some other vaguely similar AI project? Not everything in my suggested TOC is actually used in Novamente or OpenCog... but even the stuff that isn't, is interesting to know about if you're going to work on these things, just to have a general awareness of the various approaches that have been taken to these problems... A second reason for being skeptical is that there is virtually no cognitive psychology in this list - just a smattering of odd topics. Yes, that's a fair point -- that's a shortcoming of the draft TOC as I posted it. Please feel free to add some additional, relevant cog psych topics to the page ;-) -- Ben --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Instead of an AGI Textbook
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 9:39 PM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Richard, Unfortunately I cannot bring myself to believe this will help anyone new to the area. The main reason is that this is only a miscellaneous list of topics, with nothing to indicate a comprehensive theory or a unifying structure. Actually it's not a haphazardly assembled miscellaneous list of topics ... it was assembled with a purpose and structure in mind... Specifically, I was thinking of OpenCog, and what it would be good for someone to know in order to have a relatively full grasp of the OpenCog design. As such, the topic list may contain stuff that is not relevant to your AGI design, and also may miss stuff that is critical to your AGI design... But the non textbook is NOT intended as a presentation of OpenCog or any other specific AGI theory or framework. Rather, it is indeed, largely, a grab bag of relevant prerequisite information ... along with some information on specific AGI approaches... One problem I've found is that the traditional undergrad CS or AI education does not actually give all the prerequisites for really grasping AGI theories ... often topics are touched in a particularly non-AGI-ish way ... for instance, neural nets are touched but complex dynamics in NN's are skipped ... Bayes nets are touched but issues involving combining probability with more complex logic operations are skipped ... neurons are discussed but theories of holistic brain function are skipped ... etc. The most AGI-relevant stuff always seems to get skipped for lack of time..! ben --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Instead of an AGI Textbook
Ben, It is a good start! Of course everyone else will disagree --- like what Richard did and I'm going to do. ;-) I'll try to find the time to provide my list --- at this moment, it will be more like a reading list than a textbook TOC. In the future, it will be integrated into the E-book I'm working on (http://nars.wang.googlepages.com/gti-summary). Compared to yours, mine will contain less math and algorithms, but more psychology and philosophy. I'd like to see what Richard and others want to propose. We shouldn't try to merge them into one wiki page, but several. Pei On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 7:46 PM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, A lot of students email me asking me what to read to get up to speed on AGI. So I started a wiki page called Instead of an AGI Textbook, http://www.agiri.org/wiki/Instead_of_an_AGI_Textbook#Computational_Linguistics Unfortunately I did not yet find time to do much but outline a table of contents there. So I'm hoping some of you can chip in and fill in some relevant hyperlinks on the pages I've created ;-) For those of you too lazy to click the above link, here is the introductory note I put on the wiki page: I've often lamented the fact that there is no advanced undergrad level textbook for AGI, analogous to what Russell and Norvig is for Narrow AI. Unfortunately, I don't have time to write such a textbook, and no one else with the requisite knowledge and ability seems to have the time and inclination either. So, instead of a textbook, I thought it would make sense to outline here what the table of contents of such a textbook might look like, and to fill in each section within each chapter in this TOC with a few links to available online resources dealing with the topic of the section. However, all I found time to do today (March 25, 2008) is make the TOC. Maybe later I will fill in the links on each section's page, or maybe by the time I get around it some other folks will have done it. While nowhere near as good as a textbook, I do think this can be a valuable resource for those wanting to get up to speed on AGI concepts and not knowing where to turn to get started. There are some available AGI bibliographies, but a structured bibliography like this can probably be more useful than an unstructured and heterogeneous one. Naturally my initial TOC represents some of my own biases, but I trust that by having others help edit it, these biases will ultimately come out in the wash. Just to be clear: the idea here is not to present solely AGI material. Rather the idea is to present material that I think students would do well to know, if they want to work on AGI. This includes some AGI, some narrow AI, some psychology, some neuroscience, some mathematics, etc. *** -- Ben -- Ben Goertzel, PhD CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC Director of Research, SIAI [EMAIL PROTECTED] If men cease to believe that they will one day become gods then they will surely become worms. -- Henry Miller --- 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/?; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Instead of an AGI Textbook
I'll try to find the time to provide my list --- at this moment, it will be more like a reading list than a textbook TOC. That would be great -- however I may integrate your reading list into my TOC ... as I really think there is value in a structured and categorized reading list rather than just a list... I know every researcher will have their own foci, but I'm going to try to unify different researchers' suggestions into a single TOC with a sensible organization, because I would like to cut through the confusion faced by students starting out in this field of research... ben --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Instead of an AGI Textbook
Thanks Ben. AGI is a daunting field to say the least. Many scientific domains are involved in various degrees. I am very happy to see something like this, because knowing where to start is not so obvious for the beginner. I actually recently purchased Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach - but only because I did not know where else to start. I have the programming down - but, like most others, I don't know *what* to program. I really hope that others will contribute to your TOC. In fact, I am willing to put up and host an AGI Wiki if theis community would find it of use. I'd need a few weeks - because I don't have the time right now - but it is a worthwhile endeavor, and I'm happy to do it. ~Aki On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 6:46 PM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, A lot of students email me asking me what to read to get up to speed on AGI. So I started a wiki page called Instead of an AGI Textbook, http://www.agiri.org/wiki/Instead_of_an_AGI_Textbook#Computational_Linguistics Unfortunately I did not yet find time to do much but outline a table of contents there. So I'm hoping some of you can chip in and fill in some relevant hyperlinks on the pages I've created ;-) For those of you too lazy to click the above link, here is the introductory note I put on the wiki page: I've often lamented the fact that there is no advanced undergrad level textbook for AGI, analogous to what Russell and Norvig is for Narrow AI. Unfortunately, I don't have time to write such a textbook, and no one else with the requisite knowledge and ability seems to have the time and inclination either. So, instead of a textbook, I thought it would make sense to outline here what the table of contents of such a textbook might look like, and to fill in each section within each chapter in this TOC with a few links to available online resources dealing with the topic of the section. However, all I found time to do today (March 25, 2008) is make the TOC. Maybe later I will fill in the links on each section's page, or maybe by the time I get around it some other folks will have done it. While nowhere near as good as a textbook, I do think this can be a valuable resource for those wanting to get up to speed on AGI concepts and not knowing where to turn to get started. There are some available AGI bibliographies, but a structured bibliography like this can probably be more useful than an unstructured and heterogeneous one. Naturally my initial TOC represents some of my own biases, but I trust that by having others help edit it, these biases will ultimately come out in the wash. Just to be clear: the idea here is not to present solely AGI material. Rather the idea is to present material that I think students would do well to know, if they want to work on AGI. This includes some AGI, some narrow AI, some psychology, some neuroscience, some mathematics, etc. *** -- Ben -- Ben Goertzel, PhD CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC Director of Research, SIAI [EMAIL PROTECTED] If men cease to believe that they will one day become gods then they will surely become worms. -- Henry Miller --- 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/?; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com -- Aki R. Iskandar [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Instead of an AGI Textbook
Yeah, the AGIRI wiki has been there for years ... the hard thing is getting people to contribute to it (and I myself rarely find the time...) But if others don't chip in, I'll complete my little non-textbook myself sometime w/in the next month ... -- Ben On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 10:52 PM, Aki Iskandar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ok - that was silly of me. After visiting the link (which was after I sent the email), I noticed that is WAS a Wiki. My apologies. ~Aki On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 9:47 PM, Aki Iskandar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks Ben. AGI is a daunting field to say the least. Many scientific domains are involved in various degrees. I am very happy to see something like this, because knowing where to start is not so obvious for the beginner. I actually recently purchased Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach - but only because I did not know where else to start. I have the programming down - but, like most others, I don't know *what* to program. I really hope that others will contribute to your TOC. In fact, I am willing to put up and host an AGI Wiki if theis community would find it of use. I'd need a few weeks - because I don't have the time right now - but it is a worthwhile endeavor, and I'm happy to do it. ~Aki On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 6:46 PM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, A lot of students email me asking me what to read to get up to speed on AGI. So I started a wiki page called Instead of an AGI Textbook, http://www.agiri.org/wiki/Instead_of_an_AGI_Textbook#Computational_Linguistics Unfortunately I did not yet find time to do much but outline a table of contents there. So I'm hoping some of you can chip in and fill in some relevant hyperlinks on the pages I've created ;-) For those of you too lazy to click the above link, here is the introductory note I put on the wiki page: I've often lamented the fact that there is no advanced undergrad level textbook for AGI, analogous to what Russell and Norvig is for Narrow AI. Unfortunately, I don't have time to write such a textbook, and no one else with the requisite knowledge and ability seems to have the time and inclination either. So, instead of a textbook, I thought it would make sense to outline here what the table of contents of such a textbook might look like, and to fill in each section within each chapter in this TOC with a few links to available online resources dealing with the topic of the section. However, all I found time to do today (March 25, 2008) is make the TOC. Maybe later I will fill in the links on each section's page, or maybe by the time I get around it some other folks will have done it. While nowhere near as good as a textbook, I do think this can be a valuable resource for those wanting to get up to speed on AGI concepts and not knowing where to turn to get started. There are some available AGI bibliographies, but a structured bibliography like this can probably be more useful than an unstructured and heterogeneous one. Naturally my initial TOC represents some of my own biases, but I trust that by having others help edit it, these biases will ultimately come out in the wash. Just to be clear: the idea here is not to present solely AGI material. Rather the idea is to present material that I think students would do well to know, if they want to work on AGI. This includes some AGI, some narrow AI, some psychology, some neuroscience, some mathematics, etc. *** -- Ben -- Ben Goertzel, PhD CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC Director of Research, SIAI [EMAIL PROTECTED] If men cease to believe that they will one day become gods then they will surely become worms. -- Henry Miller --- 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/?; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com -- Aki R. Iskandar [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Aki R. Iskandar [EMAIL PROTECTED] agi | Archives | Modify Your Subscription -- Ben Goertzel, PhD CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC Director of Research, SIAI [EMAIL PROTECTED] If men cease to believe that they will one day become gods then they will surely become worms. -- Henry Miller --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Instead of an AGI Textbook
I actually recently purchased Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach - but only because I did not know where else to start. It's a very good book ... if you view it as providing insight into various component technologies of potential use for AGI ... rather than as saying very much directly about AGI... I have the programming down - but, like most others, I don't know *what* to program. Well I hope to solve that problem in May -- via releasing the initial version of OpenCog, plus a load of wiki pages indicating stuff that, IMO, if implemented, tuned and tested would allow OpenCog to be turned into a powerful AGI system ;-) -- Ben Ben --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Instead of an AGI Textbook
Ok - that was silly of me. After visiting the link (which was after I sent the email), I noticed that is WAS a Wiki. My apologies. ~Aki On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 9:47 PM, Aki Iskandar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks Ben. AGI is a daunting field to say the least. Many scientific domains are involved in various degrees. I am very happy to see something like this, because knowing where to start is not so obvious for the beginner. I actually recently purchased Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach - but only because I did not know where else to start. I have the programming down - but, like most others, I don't know *what* to program. I really hope that others will contribute to your TOC. In fact, I am willing to put up and host an AGI Wiki if theis community would find it of use. I'd need a few weeks - because I don't have the time right now - but it is a worthwhile endeavor, and I'm happy to do it. ~Aki On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 6:46 PM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, A lot of students email me asking me what to read to get up to speed on AGI. So I started a wiki page called Instead of an AGI Textbook, http://www.agiri.org/wiki/Instead_of_an_AGI_Textbook#Computational_Linguistics Unfortunately I did not yet find time to do much but outline a table of contents there. So I'm hoping some of you can chip in and fill in some relevant hyperlinks on the pages I've created ;-) For those of you too lazy to click the above link, here is the introductory note I put on the wiki page: I've often lamented the fact that there is no advanced undergrad level textbook for AGI, analogous to what Russell and Norvig is for Narrow AI. Unfortunately, I don't have time to write such a textbook, and no one else with the requisite knowledge and ability seems to have the time and inclination either. So, instead of a textbook, I thought it would make sense to outline here what the table of contents of such a textbook might look like, and to fill in each section within each chapter in this TOC with a few links to available online resources dealing with the topic of the section. However, all I found time to do today (March 25, 2008) is make the TOC. Maybe later I will fill in the links on each section's page, or maybe by the time I get around it some other folks will have done it. While nowhere near as good as a textbook, I do think this can be a valuable resource for those wanting to get up to speed on AGI concepts and not knowing where to turn to get started. There are some available AGI bibliographies, but a structured bibliography like this can probably be more useful than an unstructured and heterogeneous one. Naturally my initial TOC represents some of my own biases, but I trust that by having others help edit it, these biases will ultimately come out in the wash. Just to be clear: the idea here is not to present solely AGI material. Rather the idea is to present material that I think students would do well to know, if they want to work on AGI. This includes some AGI, some narrow AI, some psychology, some neuroscience, some mathematics, etc. *** -- Ben -- Ben Goertzel, PhD CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC Director of Research, SIAI [EMAIL PROTECTED] If men cease to believe that they will one day become gods then they will surely become worms. -- Henry Miller --- 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/?; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com -- Aki R. Iskandar [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Aki R. Iskandar [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Instead of an AGI Textbook
Hi Pei - What about having a tree like diagram that branches out into either: - the different paths / approaches to AGI (for instance: NARS, Novamente, and Richard's, etc.), with suggested readings at those leaves - area of study, with suggested readings at those leaves Or possibly, a Mind Map diagram that shows AGI in the middle, with the approaches stemming from it, and then either sub fields, or a reading list and / or collection of links (though the links may become outdated, dead). Point is, would a diagram help map the field - which caters to the differing approaches, and which helps those wanting to chart a course to their own learning/study ? Thanks, ~Aki On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 9:22 PM, Pei Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ben, It is a good start! Of course everyone else will disagree --- like what Richard did and I'm going to do. ;-) I'll try to find the time to provide my list --- at this moment, it will be more like a reading list than a textbook TOC. In the future, it will be integrated into the E-book I'm working on (http://nars.wang.googlepages.com/gti-summary). Compared to yours, mine will contain less math and algorithms, but more psychology and philosophy. I'd like to see what Richard and others want to propose. We shouldn't try to merge them into one wiki page, but several. Pei On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 7:46 PM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, A lot of students email me asking me what to read to get up to speed on AGI. So I started a wiki page called Instead of an AGI Textbook, http://www.agiri.org/wiki/Instead_of_an_AGI_Textbook#Computational_Linguistics Unfortunately I did not yet find time to do much but outline a table of contents there. So I'm hoping some of you can chip in and fill in some relevant hyperlinks on the pages I've created ;-) For those of you too lazy to click the above link, here is the introductory note I put on the wiki page: I've often lamented the fact that there is no advanced undergrad level textbook for AGI, analogous to what Russell and Norvig is for Narrow AI. Unfortunately, I don't have time to write such a textbook, and no one else with the requisite knowledge and ability seems to have the time and inclination either. So, instead of a textbook, I thought it would make sense to outline here what the table of contents of such a textbook might look like, and to fill in each section within each chapter in this TOC with a few links to available online resources dealing with the topic of the section. However, all I found time to do today (March 25, 2008) is make the TOC. Maybe later I will fill in the links on each section's page, or maybe by the time I get around it some other folks will have done it. While nowhere near as good as a textbook, I do think this can be a valuable resource for those wanting to get up to speed on AGI concepts and not knowing where to turn to get started. There are some available AGI bibliographies, but a structured bibliography like this can probably be more useful than an unstructured and heterogeneous one. Naturally my initial TOC represents some of my own biases, but I trust that by having others help edit it, these biases will ultimately come out in the wash. Just to be clear: the idea here is not to present solely AGI material. Rather the idea is to present material that I think students would do well to know, if they want to work on AGI. This includes some AGI, some narrow AI, some psychology, some neuroscience, some mathematics, etc. *** -- Ben -- Ben Goertzel, PhD CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC Director of Research, SIAI [EMAIL PROTECTED] If men cease to believe that they will one day become gods then they will surely become worms. -- Henry Miller --- 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/?; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com --- 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/?; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com -- Aki R. Iskandar [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Instead of an AGI Textbook
Thanks Ben. That is really exciting stuff / news. I'm loking forward to OpenCog. BTW - is OpenCog mainly in C++ (like Novamente) ? Or is it translations (to Java, or other languages) of concepts so that others can code and add to it more readily and quickly? Thanks, ~Aki On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 9:58 PM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I actually recently purchased Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach - but only because I did not know where else to start. It's a very good book ... if you view it as providing insight into various component technologies of potential use for AGI ... rather than as saying very much directly about AGI... I have the programming down - but, like most others, I don't know *what* to program. Well I hope to solve that problem in May -- via releasing the initial version of OpenCog, plus a load of wiki pages indicating stuff that, IMO, if implemented, tuned and tested would allow OpenCog to be turned into a powerful AGI system ;-) -- Ben Ben --- 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/?; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com -- Aki R. Iskandar [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Instead of an AGI Textbook
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 11:02 PM, Aki Iskandar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Pei - What about having a tree like diagram that branches out into either: - the different paths / approaches to AGI (for instance: NARS, Novamente, and Richard's, etc.), with suggested readings at those leaves - area of study, with suggested readings at those leaves Yes, that is what I like. I know Ben would rather stress the similarity of the approaches, and merge all the lists into one, but I'd rather keep the difference visible. One reason is otherwise the list will be too long for anyone to follow. Or possibly, a Mind Map diagram that shows AGI in the middle, with the approaches stemming from it, and then either sub fields, or a reading list and / or collection of links (though the links may become outdated, dead). Point is, would a diagram help map the field - which caters to the differing approaches, and which helps those wanting to chart a course to their own learning/study ? In principle, yes, but a diagram with many text in it tends to look confusing. After we get the lists, you can play with them to see what is the best way to show the information. Thanks, Pei Thanks, ~Aki On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 9:22 PM, Pei Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ben, It is a good start! Of course everyone else will disagree --- like what Richard did and I'm going to do. ;-) I'll try to find the time to provide my list --- at this moment, it will be more like a reading list than a textbook TOC. In the future, it will be integrated into the E-book I'm working on (http://nars.wang.googlepages.com/gti-summary). Compared to yours, mine will contain less math and algorithms, but more psychology and philosophy. I'd like to see what Richard and others want to propose. We shouldn't try to merge them into one wiki page, but several. Pei On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 7:46 PM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, A lot of students email me asking me what to read to get up to speed on AGI. So I started a wiki page called Instead of an AGI Textbook, http://www.agiri.org/wiki/Instead_of_an_AGI_Textbook#Computational_Linguistics Unfortunately I did not yet find time to do much but outline a table of contents there. So I'm hoping some of you can chip in and fill in some relevant hyperlinks on the pages I've created ;-) For those of you too lazy to click the above link, here is the introductory note I put on the wiki page: I've often lamented the fact that there is no advanced undergrad level textbook for AGI, analogous to what Russell and Norvig is for Narrow AI. Unfortunately, I don't have time to write such a textbook, and no one else with the requisite knowledge and ability seems to have the time and inclination either. So, instead of a textbook, I thought it would make sense to outline here what the table of contents of such a textbook might look like, and to fill in each section within each chapter in this TOC with a few links to available online resources dealing with the topic of the section. However, all I found time to do today (March 25, 2008) is make the TOC. Maybe later I will fill in the links on each section's page, or maybe by the time I get around it some other folks will have done it. While nowhere near as good as a textbook, I do think this can be a valuable resource for those wanting to get up to speed on AGI concepts and not knowing where to turn to get started. There are some available AGI bibliographies, but a structured bibliography like this can probably be more useful than an unstructured and heterogeneous one. Naturally my initial TOC represents some of my own biases, but I trust that by having others help edit it, these biases will ultimately come out in the wash. Just to be clear: the idea here is not to present solely AGI material. Rather the idea is to present material that I think students would do well to know, if they want to work on AGI. This includes some AGI, some narrow AI, some psychology, some neuroscience, some mathematics, etc. *** -- Ben -- Ben Goertzel, PhD CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC Director of Research, SIAI [EMAIL PROTECTED] If men cease to believe that they will one day become gods then they will surely become worms. -- Henry Miller --- 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/?; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com --- agi Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed:
Re: [agi] Instead of an AGI Textbook
Agree. Pei On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 11:33 PM, Aki Iskandar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sounds good Pei - thanks. Multiple lists are definitely a great start - to stress differences. And a companion master list to stress similarities would also be helpful. Everyone learns differently - and though a master list may seem intimidating, it may better represent breadth - where several distinct lists may better represent a cohesive structure(s). Having both seems to make sense. ~Aki On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 10:23 PM, Pei Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 11:02 PM, Aki Iskandar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Pei - What about having a tree like diagram that branches out into either: - the different paths / approaches to AGI (for instance: NARS, Novamente, and Richard's, etc.), with suggested readings at those leaves - area of study, with suggested readings at those leaves Yes, that is what I like. I know Ben would rather stress the similarity of the approaches, and merge all the lists into one, but I'd rather keep the difference visible. One reason is otherwise the list will be too long for anyone to follow. Or possibly, a Mind Map diagram that shows AGI in the middle, with the approaches stemming from it, and then either sub fields, or a reading list and / or collection of links (though the links may become outdated, dead). Point is, would a diagram help map the field - which caters to the differing approaches, and which helps those wanting to chart a course to their own learning/study ? In principle, yes, but a diagram with many text in it tends to look confusing. After we get the lists, you can play with them to see what is the best way to show the information. Thanks, Pei Thanks, ~Aki On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 9:22 PM, Pei Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ben, It is a good start! Of course everyone else will disagree --- like what Richard did and I'm going to do. ;-) I'll try to find the time to provide my list --- at this moment, it will be more like a reading list than a textbook TOC. In the future, it will be integrated into the E-book I'm working on (http://nars.wang.googlepages.com/gti-summary). Compared to yours, mine will contain less math and algorithms, but more psychology and philosophy. I'd like to see what Richard and others want to propose. We shouldn't try to merge them into one wiki page, but several. Pei On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 7:46 PM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, A lot of students email me asking me what to read to get up to speed on AGI. So I started a wiki page called Instead of an AGI Textbook, http://www.agiri.org/wiki/Instead_of_an_AGI_Textbook#Computational_Linguistics Unfortunately I did not yet find time to do much but outline a table of contents there. So I'm hoping some of you can chip in and fill in some relevant hyperlinks on the pages I've created ;-) For those of you too lazy to click the above link, here is the introductory note I put on the wiki page: I've often lamented the fact that there is no advanced undergrad level textbook for AGI, analogous to what Russell and Norvig is for Narrow AI. Unfortunately, I don't have time to write such a textbook, and no one else with the requisite knowledge and ability seems to have the time and inclination either. So, instead of a textbook, I thought it would make sense to outline here what the table of contents of such a textbook might look like, and to fill in each section within each chapter in this TOC with a few links to available online resources dealing with the topic of the section. However, all I found time to do today (March 25, 2008) is make the TOC. Maybe later I will fill in the links on each section's page, or maybe by the time I get around it some other folks will have done it. While nowhere near as good as a textbook, I do think this can be a valuable resource for those wanting to get up to speed on AGI concepts and not knowing where to turn to get started. There are some available AGI bibliographies, but a structured bibliography like this can probably be more useful than an unstructured and heterogeneous one. Naturally my initial TOC represents some of my own biases, but I trust that by having others help edit it, these biases will ultimately come out in the wash. Just to be clear: the idea here is not to present solely AGI material. Rather the idea is to present material that I think students would do well to know, if they want to work on AGI.
Re: [agi] Instead of an AGI Textbook
Sounds good Pei - thanks. Multiple lists are definitely a great start - to stress differences. And a companion master list to stress similarities would also be helpful. Everyone learns differently - and though a master list may seem intimidating, it may better represent breadth - where several distinct lists may better represent a cohesive structure(s). Having both seems to make sense. ~Aki On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 10:23 PM, Pei Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 11:02 PM, Aki Iskandar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Pei - What about having a tree like diagram that branches out into either: - the different paths / approaches to AGI (for instance: NARS, Novamente, and Richard's, etc.), with suggested readings at those leaves - area of study, with suggested readings at those leaves Yes, that is what I like. I know Ben would rather stress the similarity of the approaches, and merge all the lists into one, but I'd rather keep the difference visible. One reason is otherwise the list will be too long for anyone to follow. Or possibly, a Mind Map diagram that shows AGI in the middle, with the approaches stemming from it, and then either sub fields, or a reading list and / or collection of links (though the links may become outdated, dead). Point is, would a diagram help map the field - which caters to the differing approaches, and which helps those wanting to chart a course to their own learning/study ? In principle, yes, but a diagram with many text in it tends to look confusing. After we get the lists, you can play with them to see what is the best way to show the information. Thanks, Pei Thanks, ~Aki On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 9:22 PM, Pei Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ben, It is a good start! Of course everyone else will disagree --- like what Richard did and I'm going to do. ;-) I'll try to find the time to provide my list --- at this moment, it will be more like a reading list than a textbook TOC. In the future, it will be integrated into the E-book I'm working on (http://nars.wang.googlepages.com/gti-summary). Compared to yours, mine will contain less math and algorithms, but more psychology and philosophy. I'd like to see what Richard and others want to propose. We shouldn't try to merge them into one wiki page, but several. Pei On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 7:46 PM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, A lot of students email me asking me what to read to get up to speed on AGI. So I started a wiki page called Instead of an AGI Textbook, http://www.agiri.org/wiki/Instead_of_an_AGI_Textbook#Computational_Linguistics Unfortunately I did not yet find time to do much but outline a table of contents there. So I'm hoping some of you can chip in and fill in some relevant hyperlinks on the pages I've created ;-) For those of you too lazy to click the above link, here is the introductory note I put on the wiki page: I've often lamented the fact that there is no advanced undergrad level textbook for AGI, analogous to what Russell and Norvig is for Narrow AI. Unfortunately, I don't have time to write such a textbook, and no one else with the requisite knowledge and ability seems to have the time and inclination either. So, instead of a textbook, I thought it would make sense to outline here what the table of contents of such a textbook might look like, and to fill in each section within each chapter in this TOC with a few links to available online resources dealing with the topic of the section. However, all I found time to do today (March 25, 2008) is make the TOC. Maybe later I will fill in the links on each section's page, or maybe by the time I get around it some other folks will have done it. While nowhere near as good as a textbook, I do think this can be a valuable resource for those wanting to get up to speed on AGI concepts and not knowing where to turn to get started. There are some available AGI bibliographies, but a structured bibliography like this can probably be more useful than an unstructured and heterogeneous one. Naturally my initial TOC represents some of my own biases, but I trust that by having others help edit it, these biases will ultimately come out in the wash. Just to be clear: the idea here is not to present solely AGI material. Rather the idea is to present material that I think students would do well to know, if they want to work on AGI. This includes some AGI, some narrow AI, some psychology, some neuroscience, some mathematics, etc. *** -- Ben -- Ben Goertzel, PhD CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind
Re: [agi] Instead of an AGI Textbook
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 11:07 PM, Aki Iskandar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks Ben. That is really exciting stuff / news. I'm loking forward to OpenCog. BTW - is OpenCog mainly in C++ (like Novamente) ? Or is it translations (to Java, or other languages) of concepts so that others can code and add to it more readily and quickly? yes, the OpenCog core system is C++ , though there are some peripheral code libraries (e.g. the RelEx natural language preprocessor) which are in Java... ben --- 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=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Instead of an AGI Textbook
This kind of diagram would certainly be meaningful, but, it would be a lot of work to put together, even more so than a traditional TOC ... On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 11:02 PM, Aki Iskandar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Pei - What about having a tree like diagram that branches out into either: - the different paths / approaches to AGI (for instance: NARS, Novamente, and Richard's, etc.), with suggested readings at those leaves - area of study, with suggested readings at those leaves Or possibly, a Mind Map diagram that shows AGI in the middle, with the approaches stemming from it, and then either sub fields, or a reading list and / or collection of links (though the links may become outdated, dead). Point is, would a diagram help map the field - which caters to the differing approaches, and which helps those wanting to chart a course to their own learning/study ? Thanks, ~Aki On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 9:22 PM, Pei Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ben, It is a good start! Of course everyone else will disagree --- like what Richard did and I'm going to do. ;-) I'll try to find the time to provide my list --- at this moment, it will be more like a reading list than a textbook TOC. In the future, it will be integrated into the E-book I'm working on (http://nars.wang.googlepages.com/gti-summary). Compared to yours, mine will contain less math and algorithms, but more psychology and philosophy. I'd like to see what Richard and others want to propose. We shouldn't try to merge them into one wiki page, but several. Pei On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 7:46 PM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, A lot of students email me asking me what to read to get up to speed on AGI. So I started a wiki page called Instead of an AGI Textbook, http://www.agiri.org/wiki/Instead_of_an_AGI_Textbook#Computational_Linguistics Unfortunately I did not yet find time to do much but outline a table of contents there. So I'm hoping some of you can chip in and fill in some relevant hyperlinks on the pages I've created ;-) For those of you too lazy to click the above link, here is the introductory note I put on the wiki page: I've often lamented the fact that there is no advanced undergrad level textbook for AGI, analogous to what Russell and Norvig is for Narrow AI. Unfortunately, I don't have time to write such a textbook, and no one else with the requisite knowledge and ability seems to have the time and inclination either. So, instead of a textbook, I thought it would make sense to outline here what the table of contents of such a textbook might look like, and to fill in each section within each chapter in this TOC with a few links to available online resources dealing with the topic of the section. However, all I found time to do today (March 25, 2008) is make the TOC. Maybe later I will fill in the links on each section's page, or maybe by the time I get around it some other folks will have done it. While nowhere near as good as a textbook, I do think this can be a valuable resource for those wanting to get up to speed on AGI concepts and not knowing where to turn to get started. There are some available AGI bibliographies, but a structured bibliography like this can probably be more useful than an unstructured and heterogeneous one. Naturally my initial TOC represents some of my own biases, but I trust that by having others help edit it, these biases will ultimately come out in the wash. Just to be clear: the idea here is not to present solely AGI material. Rather the idea is to present material that I think students would do well to know, if they want to work on AGI. This includes some AGI, some narrow AI, some psychology, some neuroscience, some mathematics, etc. *** -- Ben -- Ben Goertzel, PhD CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC Director of Research, SIAI [EMAIL PROTECTED] If men cease to believe that they will one day become gods then they will surely become worms. -- Henry Miller --- 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/?; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com --- 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/?; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com -- Aki R. Iskandar [EMAIL PROTECTED] agi | Archives | Modify Your Subscription -- Ben Goertzel, PhD
