Jim,
An example reference on the theory of computability is Computability and
Logic by Boolos, Burgess and Jeffrey. For those who accept the
church-turing thesis, this mathematical theory provides a sufficient account
of the notion of computability, including the space of possible programs
(which
Arthur,
Your call for an AGI roadmap is well targeted. I suspect that others here
have their own, somewhat different roadmaps. These should all be merged,
like decks of cards being shuffled together, maybe with percentages
attached, so that people could announce that, say, I am 31% of the way to
http://www.ted.com/talks/matt_ridley_when_ideas_have_sex.html?utm_source=newsletter_weekly_2010-07-20utm_campaign=newsletter_weeklyutm_medium=email
Good lecture worth looking at about how trade - exchange of both goods and
ideas - has fostered civilisation. Near the end introduces a v. important
Steve Richfield wrote
maybe with percentages
attached, so that people could announce that, say, I am 31% of the
way to having an AGI.
Not useful. AGI is still a hypothetical state and its true composition
remains unknown. At best you can measure how much of an AGI plan is
completed, but
The question was asked whether, given infinite resources could Solmonoff
Induction work. I made the assumption that it was computable and found that
it wouldn't work. It is not computable, even with infinite resources, for
the kind of thing that was claimed it would do. (I believe that with a
I am not going in circles. I probably should not express myself in
replies. I made a lot of mistakes getting to the conclusion that I got to,
and I am a little uncertain as to whether the construction of the diagonal
set actually means that there would be uncountable sets for this
particular
No, the collective brain is actually a somewhat distinctive idea. It's
saying a lot more than the individual brain is embedded in society, much
more like interdependently functioning with society - that you can't say
do maths or art or any subject, or produce products or perform most of our
Ah the collective brain is saying something else as well - wh. is another
reason why I was hoping to get a discussion. It's exemplified in the example
of the mouse.
Actually, Ridley is saying, the complete knowledge to build a mouse does not
reside in any individual brain, or indeed by
Mike Tintner wrote
No, the collective brain is actually a somewhat distinctive idea.
Just a way of looking at social support networks. Even social
philosophers centuries ago had similar ideas--they were lacking our
technical understanding and used analogies from biology (organicism)
instead.
You partly illustrate my point - you talk of artificial brains as if they
actually exist - there aren't any; there are only glorified, extremely
complex calculators/computer programs - extensions/augmentations of
individual faculties of human brains. To obviously exaggerate, it's
somewhat
On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 02:25 +0100, Mike Tintner wrote:
By implicitly pretending that artificial brains exist - in the form of
computer programs - you (and most AGI-ers), deflect attention away from all
the unsolved dimensions of what is required for an independent
brain-cum-living
The most powerful concept in the universe is working together.
If atoms didn't attract and repel each other, then we'd have a universe
where nothing ever happened.
So, Collective Brain is a subset of the collective intelligence of
the universe.
On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 02:25 +0100, Mike Tintner
Mike, I think we all agree that we should not have to tell an AGI the steps to
solving problems. It should learn and figure it out, like the way that people
figure it out.
The question is how to do that. We know that it is possible. For example, I
could write a chess program that I could not
13 matches
Mail list logo
