Re: [singularity] Vista/AGI
On Sun, Apr 13, 2008 at 10:27 PM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Just my personal opinion...but it appears that the exponential technology growth chart, which is used in many of the briefings, does not include AI/AGI. It is processing centric. When you include AI/AGI the exponential technology curve flattens out in the coming years (5-7) and becomes part of a normal S curve of development. While computer power and processing will increase exponentially (as nanotechnology grows) the area of AI will need more time to develop. I would be interested in your thoughts. I think this is because progress toward general AI has been difficult to quantify in the past, and looks to remain difficult to quantify into the future... I am uncertain as to the extent to which this problem can be worked around, though. Let me introduce an analogy problem Understanding the operation of the brain better and better is to scanning the brain with higher and higher spatiotemporal accuracy, as Creating more and more powerful AGI is to what? ;-) The point is that understanding the brain is also a nebulous and hard-to-quantify goal, but we make charts for it by treating brain scan accuracy as a more easily quantifiable proxy variable. What's a comparable proxy variable for AGI? Suggestions welcome! Being able to abstract and then implement only those components and mechanisms relevant to intelligence from all the data these better brain scans provide? If intelligence can be abstracted into layers (analogous to network layers), establishing a set of performance indicators at each layer and then increasing the values corresponding to these indicators might probably provide a better measure of AGI's progress. Using that model, increments of progress might then be much easier to identify, verify and communicate even for the smallest increments. Slawek --- singularity Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/11983/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/11983/ Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=4007604id_secret=98631122-712fa4 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [singularity] Vista/AGI
Brain-scan accuracy is a very crude proxy for understanding of brain function; yet a much better proxy than anything existing for the case of AGI... On Sun, Apr 13, 2008 at 11:37 PM, Richard Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ben Goertzel wrote: Hi, Just my personal opinion...but it appears that the exponential technology growth chart, which is used in many of the briefings, does not include AI/AGI. It is processing centric. When you include AI/AGI the exponential technology curve flattens out in the coming years (5-7) and becomes part of a normal S curve of development. While computer power and processing will increase exponentially (as nanotechnology grows) the area of AI will need more time to develop. I would be interested in your thoughts. I think this is because progress toward general AI has been difficult to quantify in the past, and looks to remain difficult to quantify into the future... I am uncertain as to the extent to which this problem can be worked around, though. Let me introduce an analogy problem Understanding the operation of the brain better and better is to scanning the brain with higher and higher spatiotemporal accuracy, as Creating more and more powerful AGI is to what? ;-) The point is that understanding the brain is also a nebulous and hard-to-quantify goal, but we make charts for it by treating brain scan accuracy as a more easily quantifiable proxy variable. What's a comparable proxy variable for AGI? Suggestions welcome! Sadly, the analogy is a wee bit broken. Brain scan accuracy as a measure of progress in understanding the operation of the brain is a measure that some cognitive neuroscientists may subscribe to, but the majority of cognitive scientists outside of that area consider this to be a completely spurious idea. Doug Hofstadter said this eloquently in I Am A Strange Loop: getting a complete atom-scan in the vicinity of a windmill doesn't mean that you are making progress toward understanding why the windmill goes around. It just gives you a data analysis problem that will keep you busy until everyone in the Hot Place is eating ice cream. Richard Loosemore --- singularity Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/11983/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/11983/ Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com -- 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 --- singularity Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/11983/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/11983/ Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=4007604id_secret=98631122-712fa4 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [singularity] Vista/AGI
MI wrote: ... Being able to abstract and then implement only those components and mechanisms relevant to intelligence from all the data these better brain scans provide? If intelligence can be abstracted into layers (analogous to network layers), establishing a set of performance indicators at each layer and then increasing the values corresponding to these indicators might probably provide a better measure of AGI's progress. Using that model, increments of progress might then be much easier to identify, verify and communicate even for the smallest increments. Slawek Abstracting away the non-central-to-AI parts of the brain isn't necessary. Try it this way (a possible, if not plausible path to AI). 1) Artificial knee/hip joints 2) Artificial corneas 3) Artificial retinas 4) Artificial cochlea 5) Artificial vertebrae 6) Nerve welds to rejoin severed spinal nerves 7) Artificial nerves 8) Artificial nerve welds to repair severed optic/aural nerves 9) Artificial visual or audio cortex 10) Repair of stroke damaged nerves 11) Replacement of damaged portions of the brain with artificial replacements (Hippocampus, etc.) 12) Repair of damaged brains in infants (birth defects) 13) continue on with gradually more significant replacements...at some point you'll hit an AGI. P.S.: I think this is a workable approach, but one that will materialize too slowly to dominate. Still, we're already working on steps 2, 3, 4, 5. Possibly also 6. --- singularity Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/11983/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/11983/ Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=4007604id_secret=98631122-712fa4 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
