This is probably a tad off-topic, but I couldn't help myself.
>From the Technology-We-Could-Probably-Do-Without files:
STEP RIGHT UP, LET THE COMPUTER LOOK AT YOUR FACE AND TELL YOU YOUR AGE
http://www.physorg.com/news141394850.html
>From the article:
"...age-recognition algorithms could ... pr
2008/10/2 Brad Paulsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> It "boasts" a 50% recognition accuracy rate +/-5 years and an 80%
> recognition accuracy rate +/-10 years. Unless, of course, the subject is
> wearing a big floppy hat, makeup or has had Botox treatment recently. Or
> found his dad's Ronald Reagan mas
surveillance is here to stay. Get used to it.
-- Matt Mahoney, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- On Thu, 10/2/08, Bob Mottram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Bob Mottram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [agi] Let's face it, this is just dumb.
> To: agi@v2.listbox.com
> Date: Thurs
t Mahoney, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> --- On Thu, 10/2/08, Bob Mottram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > From: Bob Mottram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subject: Re: [agi] Let's face it, this is just dumb.
> > To: agi@v2.listbox.com
> > Date: Thursda
--- On Thu, 10/2/08, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I hope not to sound like a broken record here ... but ... not every
>narrow AI advance is actually a step toward AGI ...
It is if AGI is billions of narrow experts and a distributed index to get your
messages to the right ones.
I und
On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 2:02 PM, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- On Thu, 10/2/08, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >I hope not to sound like a broken record here ... but ... not every
> >narrow AI advance is actually a step toward AGI ...
>
> It is if AGI is billions of nar
-- Matt Mahoney, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- On Thu, 10/2/08, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From: Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [agi] Let's face it, this is just dumb.
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Date: Thursday, October 2, 2008, 2:08 PM
On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 2:02
lex organizations quickly.
>
> -- Matt Mahoney, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> --- On *Thu, 10/2/08, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>* wrote:
>
> From: Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [agi] Let's face it, this is just dumb.
> To: agi@v2.listbox.com
> Dat
it.
>
> -- Matt Mahoney, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> --- On Thu, 10/2/08, Bob Mottram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> From: Bob Mottram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [agi] Let's face
>> it, this is just dumb. To: agi@v2.listbox.com Date: Thursday, Octo
he
> > reporters. A legitimate application could be estimating the average age
> > plus or minus 2 months of a group of 1000 shoppers in a marketing study.
> >
> >
> > In any case, machine surveillance is here to stay. Get used to it.
> >
> > -- Matt Mahoney
--- On Thu, 10/2/08, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OTOH a global brain coordinating humans and narrow-AI's can **also** be quite
> dangerous ... and arguably more so, because it's **definitely** very
> unpredictable in almost every aspect ... whereas a system with a dual
> hierarchic
Hi,
> CMR (my proposal) has no centralized control (global brain). It is a
> competitive market in which information has negative value. The environment
> is a peer-to-peer network where peers receive messages in natural language,
> cache a copy, and route them to appropriate experts based on con
--- On Fri, 10/3/08, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You seem to misunderstand the notion of a Global Brain, see
>
> http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/GBRAIFAQ.html
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_brain
You are right. That is exactly what I am proposing.
>>I believe that CMR is initiall
On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 9:57 PM, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- On Fri, 10/3/08, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > You seem to misunderstand the notion of a Global Brain, see
> >
> > http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/GBRAIFAQ.html
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_brain
>
14 matches
Mail list logo
