> To me it's almost enough to know that both you and Eliezer agree that
> the AIXItl system can be 'broken' by the challenge he set and that a
> human digital simulation might not. The next step is to ask "so what?".
> What has this got to do with the AGI friendliness issue.
This last point of E
Hi Ben,
>From a high order implications point of view I'm not sure that we need
too much written up from the last discussion.
To me it's almost enough to know that both you and Eliezer agree that
the AIXItl system can be 'broken' by the challenge he set and that a
human digital simulation migh
Philip,
Unfortunately, I don't have time to maintain a Web record of the key
points I make in an e-mail dialogue -- frankly, I don't *really* even have
time for as much e-mailing as I've been doing this last week
!!
Hopefully Eliezer will write up a brief paper on his observations about
I was just thinking, it might be useful to make sure that in pusuing the
"Breaking AIXI-tl - AGI friendliness" debate we should be clear what the
starting issue is.
I think it is best defined by Eliezer's post on 12 Feb and Ben's reply of
the same day
Eliezer's post:
http://www.mail-archive.c
Ben,
Thanks for that. Your explanation makes the whole thing a lot clearer.
I'll come back to this thread again after Eliezer's discussion on AGI
friendliness has progressed a bit further.
Cheers, Philip
From: "Ben Goertzel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL
Hi Eliezer/Ben/all,
Well if the Breaking AIXI-tl discussion
was the warm up then the
discussion of the hard stuff on AGI friendliness is going to be really
something! Bring it on! :)
Just a couple of suggestions about
the methodology of the discussion -
could we complement e
Ben Goertzel wrote:
Actually, Eliezer said he had two points about AIXItl:
1) that it could be "broken" in the sense he's described
2) that it was intrinsically un-Friendly
So far he has only made point 1), and has not gotten to point 2) !!!
As for a general point about the teachability of Fri
Hi,
As
we're thinking about it now, Novamente Version 1 will not have feature 4.
It will involve Novamente learning a lot of small programs to use within its
overall architecture, but not modifying its overall
architecture.
Technically speaking: Novamente Version 1 will be C++
code,
Hi Ben,
As far as I can work out, there are
four things that could conceivably
contribute to a Novamente reaching human intelligence parity:
1 the cleverness/power
of the original architecture
2 the intensity, length
and effectiveness of the Novamente learning
after being booted
Actually, Eliezer said he had two points about AIXItl:
1) that it could be "broken" in the sense he's described
2) that it was intrinsically un-Friendly
So far he has only made point 1), and has not gotten to point 2) !!!
As for a general point about the teachability of Friendliness, I don't t
Hi Eliezer/Ben,
My recollection was that Eliezer initiated the "Breaking AIXI-tl"
discussion as a way of proving that friendliness of AGIs had to be
consciously built in at the start and couldn't be assumed to be
teachable at a later point. (Or have I totally lost the plot?)
Do you feel the di
11 matches
Mail list logo
