[agi] Tesla Journal Submission: Mentifex Mad Science
Mad Science Theory-Based Artificial Intelligence Abstract The patient insists that he has created an artificial Mind, a virtual entity capable of abstract thought and self-awareness. Further, his research is too dangerous to be published outside of the Tesla Journal, because Mentifex AI leads inexorably to an Extinction Level Event (ELE) known as the Technological Singularity. Crazies and mountebanks have flocked to the growing vanguard of self-styled Singularitarians, Transhumanists, Extropians, Netkooks, Lambda- Calculoids, Associate Professors, Double-Baggers, AI Fellows, Earth-Firsters, Neats and Scruffies, Idiot Savants and Boulevardier Poseurs ad nauseam et ad infinitum. Various camps come together annually at the Rainbow Gathering, the Singularity Summit, and the Indianapolis 500. http://aicookbook.com/wiki/Main_Page http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/2010-August/ http://practicalai.org http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/tesla.html http://www.teslajournal.com Mentifex Mad Scientist -- Mad people of comp.lang.lisp http://www.tfeb.org/lisp/mad-people.html --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] $35 ( 2GB RAM) it is
This is done in a university in my city.! :) That is our Education Minister :) cheers, Deepak On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 6:04 PM, Mike Tintner tint...@blueyonder.co.ukwrote: http://shockedinvestor.blogspot.com/2010/07/new-35-laptop-unveiled.html --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com -- cheers, Deepak --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] $35 ( 2GB RAM) it is
sounds like a great achievement - or not? From: deepakjnath Sent: Saturday, August 07, 2010 2:55 PM To: agi Subject: Re: [agi] $35 ( 2GB RAM) it is This is done in a university in my city.! :) That is our Education Minister :) cheers, Deepak On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 6:04 PM, Mike Tintner tint...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote: http://shockedinvestor.blogspot.com/2010/07/new-35-laptop-unveiled.html --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com -- cheers, Deepak agi | Archives | Modify Your Subscription --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Epiphany - Statements of Stupidity
John, You brought up some interesting points... On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 10:54 PM, John G. Rose johnr...@polyplexic.comwrote: -Original Message- From: Steve Richfield [mailto:steve.richfi...@gmail.com] On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 10:09 AM, John G. Rose johnr...@polyplexic.com wrote: statements of stupidity - some of these are examples of cramming sophisticated thoughts into simplistic compressed text. Definitely, as even the thoughts of stupid people transcends our (present) ability to state what is happening behind their eyeballs. Most stupidity is probably beyond simple recognition. For the initial moment, I was just looking at the linguistic low hanging fruit. You are talking about, those phrases, some are clichés, There seems to be no clear boundary between clichés and other stupid statements, except maybe that clichés are exactly quoted like that's just your opinion while other statements are grammatically adapted to fit the sentences and paragraphs that they inhabit. Dr. Eliza already translates idioms before processing. I could add clichés without changing a line of code, e.g. that's just your opinion might translate into something like I am too stupid to to understand your explanation. Dr. Eliza has an extensive wildcard handler, so it should be able to handle the majority of grammatically adapted statements in the same way, by simply including appropriate wildcards in the pattern. are like local K complexity minima, in a knowledge graph of partial linguistic structure, where neural computational energy is preserved, and the statements are patterns with isomorphisms to other experiential knowledge intra and inter agent. That is, other illogical misunderstanding of the real world, which are probably NOT shared with more intelligent agents. This present a serious problem with understanding by more intelligent agents. More intelligent agents have ways of working more optimally with the neural computational energy, perhaps by using other more efficient patterns thus avoiding those particular detrimental pattern/statements. ... and this present a communications problem with agents with radically different intelligences, both greater and lesser. But the statements are catchy because they are common and allow some minimization of computational energy as well as they are like objects in a higher level communication protocol. To store them is less bits and transfer is less bits per second. However, they have negative information content - if that is possible, because they require a false model of the world to process, and produce completely erroneous results. Of course, despite these problems, they DO somewhat accurately communicate the erroneous nature of the thinking, so there IS some value there. Their impact is maximal since they are isomorphic across knowledge and experience. ... the ultimate being: Do, or do not. There is no try. At some point they may just become symbols due to their pre-calculated commonness. Egad, symbols to display stupidity. Could linguistics have anything that is WORSE?! Language is both intelligence enhancing and limiting. Human language is a protocol between agents. So there is minimalist data transfer, I had no choice but to ... is a compressed summary of potentially vastly complex issues. My point is that they could have left the country, killed their adversaries, taken on a new ID, or done any number of radical things that they probably never considered, other than taking whatever action they chose to take. A more accurate statement might be I had no apparent rational choice but to The other low probability choices are lossily compressed out of the expressed statement pattern. It's assumed that there were other choices, usually factored in during the communicational complexity related decompression, being situational. The onus at times is on the person listening to the stupid statement. I see. This example was in reality a gapped or ellipsis, where reasonably presumed words were omitted. These are always a challenge, except in common places like clichés where the missing words can be automatically inserted. Thanks again for your thoughts. Steve = The mind gets hung-up sometimes on this language of ours. Better off at times to think less using English language and express oneself with a wider spectrum communiqué. Doing a dance and throwing paint in the air for example, as some *primitive* cultures actually do, conveys information also and is medium of expression rather than using a restrictive human chat protocol. You are saying that the problem is that our present communication permits statements of stupidity, so we shouldn't have our present system of communication? Scrap English?!!! I consider statements of stupidity as a sort of communications checksum, to see if real interchange of ideas is even possible. Often, it is
Re: [agi] Epiphany - Statements of Stupidity
I wanted to see what other people's views were.My own view of the risks is as follows. If the Turing Machine is built to be as isomorphic with humans as possible, it would be incredibly dangerous. Indeed I feel that the biological model is far more dangerous than the mathematical. If on the other hand the TM was *not* isomorphic and made no attempt to be, the dangers would be a lot less. Most Turing/Löbner entries are chatterboxes that work on databases. The database being filled as you chat. Clearly the system cannot go outside its database and is safe. There is in fact some use for such a chatterbox. Clearly a Turing machine would be able to infiltrate militant groups however it was constructed. As for it pretending to be stupid, it would have to know in what direction it had to be stupid. Hence it would have to be a good psychologist. Suppose it logged onto a jihardist website, as well as being able to pass itself off as a true adherent, it could also look at the other members and assess their level of commitment and knowledge. I think that the true Turing/Löbner test is not working in a laboratory environment but they should log onto jihardist sites and see how well they can pass themselves off. If it could do that it really would have arrived. Eventually it could pass itself off as a *peniti* to use the Mafia term and produce arguments from the Qur'an against the militant position. There would be quite a lot of contracts to be had if there were a realistic prospect of doing this. - Ian Parker On 7 August 2010 06:50, John G. Rose johnr...@polyplexic.com wrote: Philosophical question 2 - Would passing the TT assume human stupidity and if so would a Turing machine be dangerous? Not necessarily, the Turing machine could talk about things like jihad without ultimately identifying with it. Humans without augmentation are only so intelligent. A Turing machine would be potentially dangerous, a really well built one. At some point we'd need to see some DNA as ID of another extended TT. Philosophical question 3 :- Would a TM be a psychologist? I think it would have to be. Could a TM become part of a population simulation that would give us political insights. You can have a relatively stupid TM or a sophisticated one just like humans. It might be easier to pass the TT by not exposing too much intelligence. John These 3 questions seem to me to be the really interesting ones. - Ian Parker --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Help requested: Making a list of (non-robotic) AGI low hanging fruit apps
Wouldn't it depend on the other researcher's area of expertise? -- Matt Mahoney, matmaho...@yahoo.com From: Ben Goertzel b...@goertzel.org To: agi agi@v2.listbox.com Sent: Sat, August 7, 2010 9:10:23 PM Subject: [agi] Help requested: Making a list of (non-robotic) AGI low hanging fruit apps Hi, A fellow AGI researcher sent me this request, so I figured I'd throw it out to you guys I'm putting together an AGI pitch for investors and thinking of low hanging fruit applications to argue for. I'm intentionally not involving any mechanics (robots, moving parts, etc.). I'm focusing on voice (i.e. conversational agents) and perhaps vision-based systems. Hellen Keller AGI, if you will :) Along those lines, I'd like any ideas you may have that would fall under this description. I need to substantiate the case for such AGI technology by making an argument for high-value apps. All ideas are welcome. All serious responses will be appreciated!! Also, I would be grateful if we could keep this thread closely focused on direct answers to this question, rather than digressive discussions on Helen Keller, the nature of AGI, the definition of AGI versus narrow AI, the achievability or unachievability of AGI, etc. etc. If you think the question is bad or meaningless or unclear or whatever, that's fine, but please start a new thread with a different subject line to make your point. If the discussion is useful, my intention is to mine the answers into a compact list to convey to him Thanks! Ben G --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Help requested: Making a list of (non-robotic) AGI low hanging fruit apps
His request explicitly said he is focusing on voice and vision. I think that is enough specificity... ben On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 9:22 PM, Matt Mahoney matmaho...@yahoo.com wrote: Wouldn't it depend on the other researcher's area of expertise? -- Matt Mahoney, matmaho...@yahoo.com -- *From:* Ben Goertzel b...@goertzel.org *To:* agi agi@v2.listbox.com *Sent:* Sat, August 7, 2010 9:10:23 PM *Subject:* [agi] Help requested: Making a list of (non-robotic) AGI low hanging fruit apps Hi, A fellow AGI researcher sent me this request, so I figured I'd throw it out to you guys I'm putting together an AGI pitch for investors and thinking of low hanging fruit applications to argue for. I'm intentionally not involving any mechanics (robots, moving parts, etc.). I'm focusing on voice (i.e. conversational agents) and perhaps vision-based systems. Hellen Keller AGI, if you will :) Along those lines, I'd like any ideas you may have that would fall under this description. I need to substantiate the case for such AGI technology by making an argument for high-value apps. All ideas are welcome. All serious responses will be appreciated!! Also, I would be grateful if we could keep this thread closely focused on direct answers to this question, rather than digressive discussions on Helen Keller, the nature of AGI, the definition of AGI versus narrow AI, the achievability or unachievability of AGI, etc. etc. If you think the question is bad or meaningless or unclear or whatever, that's fine, but please start a new thread with a different subject line to make your point. If the discussion is useful, my intention is to mine the answers into a compact list to convey to him Thanks! Ben G --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com *agi* | Archives https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ | Modifyhttps://www.listbox.com/member/?;Your Subscription http://www.listbox.com -- Ben Goertzel, PhD CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC CTO, Genescient Corp Vice Chairman, Humanity+ Advisor, Singularity University and Singularity Institute External Research Professor, Xiamen University, China b...@goertzel.org I admit that two times two makes four is an excellent thing, but if we are to give everything its due, two times two makes five is sometimes a very charming thing too. -- Fyodor Dostoevsky --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Help requested: Making a list of (non-robotic) AGI low hanging fruit apps
Ben, -The oft-mentioned stock-market prediction; -data mining, especially for corporate data such as customer behavior, sales prediction, etc; -decision support systems; -personal assistants; -chatbots (think, an ipod that talks to you when you are lonely); -educational uses including human-like artificial teachers, but also including smart presentation-of-material software which decides what practice problem to ask you next, when to give tips, etc; -industrial design (engineering); ... Good luck to him! --Abram On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 9:10 PM, Ben Goertzel b...@goertzel.org wrote: Hi, A fellow AGI researcher sent me this request, so I figured I'd throw it out to you guys I'm putting together an AGI pitch for investors and thinking of low hanging fruit applications to argue for. I'm intentionally not involving any mechanics (robots, moving parts, etc.). I'm focusing on voice (i.e. conversational agents) and perhaps vision-based systems. Hellen Keller AGI, if you will :) Along those lines, I'd like any ideas you may have that would fall under this description. I need to substantiate the case for such AGI technology by making an argument for high-value apps. All ideas are welcome. All serious responses will be appreciated!! Also, I would be grateful if we could keep this thread closely focused on direct answers to this question, rather than digressive discussions on Helen Keller, the nature of AGI, the definition of AGI versus narrow AI, the achievability or unachievability of AGI, etc. etc. If you think the question is bad or meaningless or unclear or whatever, that's fine, but please start a new thread with a different subject line to make your point. If the discussion is useful, my intention is to mine the answers into a compact list to convey to him Thanks! Ben G --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com -- Abram Demski http://lo-tho.blogspot.com/ http://groups.google.com/group/one-logic --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Help requested: Making a list of (non-robotic) AGI low hanging fruit apps
Why don't you kick it off with a suggestion of your own? (I think there are only lower/basic *robotic* AGI apps- and suggest no one will come up with any answers for you. Why don't you disprove me?) -- From: Ben Goertzel b...@goertzel.org Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2010 2:10 AM To: agi agi@v2.listbox.com Subject: [agi] Help requested: Making a list of (non-robotic) AGI low hanging fruit apps Hi, A fellow AGI researcher sent me this request, so I figured I'd throw it out to you guys I'm putting together an AGI pitch for investors and thinking of low hanging fruit applications to argue for. I'm intentionally not involving any mechanics (robots, moving parts, etc.). I'm focusing on voice (i.e. conversational agents) and perhaps vision-based systems. Hellen Keller AGI, if you will :) Along those lines, I'd like any ideas you may have that would fall under this description. I need to substantiate the case for such AGI technology by making an argument for high-value apps. All ideas are welcome. All serious responses will be appreciated!! Also, I would be grateful if we could keep this thread closely focused on direct answers to this question, rather than digressive discussions on Helen Keller, the nature of AGI, the definition of AGI versus narrow AI, the achievability or unachievability of AGI, etc. etc. If you think the question is bad or meaningless or unclear or whatever, that's fine, but please start a new thread with a different subject line to make your point. If the discussion is useful, my intention is to mine the answers into a compact list to convey to him Thanks! Ben G --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Help requested: Making a list of (non-robotic) AGI low hanging fruit apps
Hey Ben, Faster, cheaper, and more robust 3D modeling for the movie industry. The modeling allows different sources of video content to be extracted from scenes, manipulated and mixed with others. The movie industry has the money and motivation to extract data from images. Making it easier, more robust and cheaper could drive innovation and progress. Why is it AGI-related? Because AGI requires knowledge. Knowledge can be extracted from facts about the world. Facts can be extracted from images in a general way using a limited set of algorithms and concepts. Some say that computer vision is AI-complete and requires knowledge to do. But, I have to disagree. Given sufficient data and good images from multiple cameras or devices, unambiguous data can extract very accurate 3D models. If this was AI-completed and required knowledge, that would not be possible. Dave On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 9:10 PM, Ben Goertzel b...@goertzel.org wrote: Hi, A fellow AGI researcher sent me this request, so I figured I'd throw it out to you guys I'm putting together an AGI pitch for investors and thinking of low hanging fruit applications to argue for. I'm intentionally not involving any mechanics (robots, moving parts, etc.). I'm focusing on voice (i.e. conversational agents) and perhaps vision-based systems. Hellen Keller AGI, if you will :) Along those lines, I'd like any ideas you may have that would fall under this description. I need to substantiate the case for such AGI technology by making an argument for high-value apps. All ideas are welcome. All serious responses will be appreciated!! Also, I would be grateful if we could keep this thread closely focused on direct answers to this question, rather than digressive discussions on Helen Keller, the nature of AGI, the definition of AGI versus narrow AI, the achievability or unachievability of AGI, etc. etc. If you think the question is bad or meaningless or unclear or whatever, that's fine, but please start a new thread with a different subject line to make your point. If the discussion is useful, my intention is to mine the answers into a compact list to convey to him Thanks! Ben G --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Help requested: Making a list of (non-robotic) AGI low hanging fruit apps
If you can do better voice recognition, that's a significant application in its own right, as well as having uses in other applications e.g. automated first layer for call centers. If you can do better image/video recognition, there are a great many uses for that -- look at all the things people are trying to use image recognition for at the moment. If you can do both at the same time, that's going to have plenty of uses for filtering, classifying and searching video. (Imagine being able to search the Youtube archives like you can search the Web today. I would guess Google would pay a few bob for technology that could do that.) On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 2:10 AM, Ben Goertzel b...@goertzel.org wrote: Hi, A fellow AGI researcher sent me this request, so I figured I'd throw it out to you guys I'm putting together an AGI pitch for investors and thinking of low hanging fruit applications to argue for. I'm intentionally not involving any mechanics (robots, moving parts, etc.). I'm focusing on voice (i.e. conversational agents) and perhaps vision-based systems. Hellen Keller AGI, if you will :) Along those lines, I'd like any ideas you may have that would fall under this description. I need to substantiate the case for such AGI technology by making an argument for high-value apps. All ideas are welcome. All serious responses will be appreciated!! Also, I would be grateful if we could keep this thread closely focused on direct answers to this question, rather than digressive discussions on Helen Keller, the nature of AGI, the definition of AGI versus narrow AI, the achievability or unachievability of AGI, etc. etc. If you think the question is bad or meaningless or unclear or whatever, that's fine, but please start a new thread with a different subject line to make your point. If the discussion is useful, my intention is to mine the answers into a compact list to convey to him Thanks! Ben G --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Help requested: Making a list of (non-robotic) AGI low hanging fruit apps
Ben, Dr. Eliza with the Gracie interface to Dragon NaturallySpeaking makes a really spectacular speech I/O demo - when it works, which is ~50% of the time. The other 50% of the time, it fails to recognize enough to run with, misses something critical, etc., and just sounds stupid, kinda like most doctors I know. Even when it fails, it still babbles on with domain-specific comments. Results are MUCH better when a person with speech I/O and chronic illness experience operates it. Note that Gracie handles interruptions and other violations of conversational structure. Further, it speaks in 3 voices, one for the expert, one for the assistant, and one for the environment and OS. Note that the Microsoft standard speech I/O has a mouth control that moves simultaneously with the sound, that is pasted on an egghead face, so you can watch it speak. Note that the speech recognition works AMAZINGLY well, because the ONLY thing it is interested in are long technical words and relevant phrases, and NOT in the short connecting words that are what usually gets messed up. When you watch what was recognized during casual conversation, what you typically see is gobbledygook between the important stuff, which comes shining through. There are plans to greatly enhance all this, but like everything else on this forum, it suffers from inadequate resources. If someone is looking for something that is demonstrable right now to throw even modest resources into... That program was then adapted to a web server by adding logic to sense when it was on a server, whereupon some additional buttons appear to operate and debug it in a server environment. That adapted program is now up and running, without any of the speech I/O stuff, on http://www.DrEliza.com. I know, it isn't AGI, but neither is anything else these days. Any interest? Steve On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 6:10 PM, Ben Goertzel b...@goertzel.org wrote: Hi, A fellow AGI researcher sent me this request, so I figured I'd throw it out to you guys I'm putting together an AGI pitch for investors and thinking of low hanging fruit applications to argue for. I'm intentionally not involving any mechanics (robots, moving parts, etc.). I'm focusing on voice (i.e. conversational agents) and perhaps vision-based systems. Hellen Keller AGI, if you will :) Along those lines, I'd like any ideas you may have that would fall under this description. I need to substantiate the case for such AGI technology by making an argument for high-value apps. All ideas are welcome. All serious responses will be appreciated!! Also, I would be grateful if we could keep this thread closely focused on direct answers to this question, rather than digressive discussions on Helen Keller, the nature of AGI, the definition of AGI versus narrow AI, the achievability or unachievability of AGI, etc. etc. If you think the question is bad or meaningless or unclear or whatever, that's fine, but please start a new thread with a different subject line to make your point. If the discussion is useful, my intention is to mine the answers into a compact list to convey to him Thanks! Ben G --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Epiphany - Statements of Stupidity
Ian, I recall several years ago that a group in Britain was operating just such a chatterbox as you explained, but did so on numerous sex-related sites, all running simultaneously. The chatterbox emulated young girls looking for sex. The program just sat there doing its thing on numerous sites, and whenever a meeting was set up, it would issue a message to its human owners to alert the police to go and arrest the pedophiles at the arranged time and place. No human interaction was needed between arrests. I can imagine an adaptation, wherein a program claims to be manufacturing explosives, and is looking for other people to deliver those explosives. With such a story line, there should be no problem arranging deliveries, at which time you would arrest the would-be bombers. I wish I could tell you more about the British project, but they were VERY secretive. I suspect that some serious Googling would yield much more. Hopefully you will find this helpful. Steve = On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 1:16 PM, Ian Parker ianpark...@gmail.com wrote: I wanted to see what other people's views were.My own view of the risks is as follows. If the Turing Machine is built to be as isomorphic with humans as possible, it would be incredibly dangerous. Indeed I feel that the biological model is far more dangerous than the mathematical. If on the other hand the TM was *not* isomorphic and made no attempt to be, the dangers would be a lot less. Most Turing/Löbner entries are chatterboxes that work on databases. The database being filled as you chat. Clearly the system cannot go outside its database and is safe. There is in fact some use for such a chatterbox. Clearly a Turing machine would be able to infiltrate militant groups however it was constructed. As for it pretending to be stupid, it would have to know in what direction it had to be stupid. Hence it would have to be a good psychologist. Suppose it logged onto a jihardist website, as well as being able to pass itself off as a true adherent, it could also look at the other members and assess their level of commitment and knowledge. I think that the true Turing/Löbner test is not working in a laboratory environment but they should log onto jihardist sites and see how well they can pass themselves off. If it could do that it really would have arrived. Eventually it could pass itself off as a *peniti* to use the Mafia term and produce arguments from the Qur'an against the militant position. There would be quite a lot of contracts to be had if there were a realistic prospect of doing this. - Ian Parker On 7 August 2010 06:50, John G. Rose johnr...@polyplexic.com wrote: Philosophical question 2 - Would passing the TT assume human stupidity and if so would a Turing machine be dangerous? Not necessarily, the Turing machine could talk about things like jihad without ultimately identifying with it. Humans without augmentation are only so intelligent. A Turing machine would be potentially dangerous, a really well built one. At some point we'd need to see some DNA as ID of another extended TT. Philosophical question 3 :- Would a TM be a psychologist? I think it would have to be. Could a TM become part of a population simulation that would give us political insights. You can have a relatively stupid TM or a sophisticated one just like humans. It might be easier to pass the TT by not exposing too much intelligence. John These 3 questions seem to me to be the really interesting ones. - Ian Parker --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com *agi* | Archives https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ | Modifyhttps://www.listbox.com/member/?;Your Subscription http://www.listbox.com --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] How To Create General AI Draft2
Abram, Thanks for the comments. I think probability is just one way to deal with uncertainty. Defeasible reasoning is another. Non-monotonic logic of various implementations. I often think that probability is the wrong way to do some things regarding AGI design. Maybe things can't be known with super high confidence, but we still want as high confidence as reasonably possible. Once we have that, we just have to have working assumptions and working hypotheses. From there we need the ability to update beliefs if we can find a reason to think the beliefs are wrong... Dave On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 9:48 PM, Abram Demski abramdem...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 8:22 PM, Abram Demski abramdem...@gmail.comwrote: (Without this sort of generality, your approach seems restricted to gathering knowledge about whatever events unfold in front of a limited quantity of high-quality camera systems which you set up. To be honest, the usefulness of that sort of knowledge is not obvious.) On second thought, this statement was a bit naive. You obviously intend the camera systems to be connected to robots or other systems which perform actual tasks in the world, providing a great variety of information including feedback from success/failure of actions to achieve results. What is unrealistic to me is not that this information could be useful, but that this level of real-world intelligence could be achieved with the super-high confidence bounds you are imagining. What I think is that probabilistic reasoning is needed. Once we have the object/location/texture information with those confidence bounds (which I do see as possible), gaining the sort of knowledge Cyc set out to contain seems inherently statistical. --Abram On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 4:44 PM, David Jones davidher...@gmail.comwrote: Hey Guys, I've been working on writing out my approach to create general AI to share and debate it with others in the field. I've attached my second draft of it in PDF format, if you guys are at all interested. It's still a work in progress and hasn't been fully edited. Please feel free to comment, positively or negatively, if you have a chance to read any of it. I'll be adding to and editing it over the next few days. I'll try to reply more professionally than I have been lately :) Sorry :S Cheers, Dave *agi* | Archives https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ | Modifyhttps://www.listbox.com/member/?;Your Subscription http://www.listbox.com -- Abram Demski http://lo-tho.blogspot.com/ http://groups.google.com/group/one-logic -- Abram Demski http://lo-tho.blogspot.com/ http://groups.google.com/group/one-logic *agi* | Archives https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ | Modifyhttps://www.listbox.com/member/?;Your Subscription http://www.listbox.com --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] How To Create General AI Draft2
Mike, I took your comments into consideration and have been updating my paper to make sure these problems are addressed. See more comments below. On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 8:15 PM, Mike Tintner tint...@blueyonder.co.ukwrote: 1) You don't define the difference between narrow AI and AGI - or make clear why your approach is one and not the other I removed this because my audience is for AI researchers... this is AGI 101. I think it's clear that my design defines general as being able to handle the vast majority of things we want the AI to handle without requiring a change in design. 2) Learning about the world won't cut it - vast nos. of progs. claim they can learn about the world - what's the difference between narrow AI and AGI learning? The difference is in what you can or can't learn about and what tasks you can or can't perform. If the AI is able to receive input about anything it needs to know about in the same formats that it knows how to understand and analyze, it can reason about anything it needs to. 3) Breaking things down into generic components allows us to learn about and handle the vast majority of things we want to learn about. This is what makes it general! Wild assumption, unproven or at all demonstrated and untrue. You are only right that I haven't demonstrated it. I will address this in the next paper and continue adding details over the next few drafts. As a simple argument against your counter argument... If that were true that we could not understand the world using a limited set of rules or concepts, how is it that a human baby, with a design that is predetermined to interact with the world a certain way by its DNA, is able to deal with unforeseen things that were not preprogrammed? That’s right, the baby was born with a set of rules that robustly allows it to deal with the unforeseen. It has a limited set of rules used to learn. That is equivalent to a limited set of “concepts” (i.e. rules) that would allow a computer to deal with the unforeseen. Interesting philosophically because it implicitly underlies AGI-ers' fantasies of take-off. You can compare it to the idea that all science can be reduced to physics. If it could, then an AGI could indeed take-off. But it's demonstrably not so. No... it is equivalent to saying that the whole world can be modeled as if everything was made up of matter. Oh, I forgot, that is the case :) It is a limited set of concepts, yet it can create everything we know. You don't seem to understand that the problem of AGI is to deal with the NEW - the unfamiliar, that wh. cannot be broken down into familiar categories, - and then find ways of dealing with it ad hoc. You don't seem to understand that even the things you think cannot be broken down, can be. Dave --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
