[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: AI isn't cheap (was Re: Real vs. simulated environments (was
Re: [agi] draft for comment.. P.S.))
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Date: Saturday, September 6, 2008, 2:58 PM
Matt,
I heartily disagree with your view as expressed here, and as stated to my
by heads of CS
Matt,
I heartily disagree with your view as expressed here, and as stated to my by
heads of CS departments and other high ranking CS PhDs, nearly (but not
quite) all of whom have lost the fire in the belly that we all once had
for CS/AGI.
I DO agree that CS is like every other technological
: Steve Richfield [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: AI isn't cheap (was Re: Real vs. simulated environments (was Re:
[agi] draft for comment.. P.S.))
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Date: Saturday, September 6, 2008, 2:58 PM
Matt,
I heartily disagree with your view as expressed here, and as stated to my by
heads
Matt,
FINALLY, someone here is saying some of the same things that I have been
saying. With general agreement with your posting, I will make some
comments...
On 9/4/08, Matt Mahoney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- On Thu, 9/4/08, Valentina Poletti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ppl like Ben argue that
--- On Fri, 9/5/08, Steve Richfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think that a billion or so, divided up into small pieces to fund EVERY
disparate approach to see where the low hanging fruit is, would go a
LONG way in guiding subsequent billions. I doubt that it would take a
trillion to succeed.
That's if you aim at getting an AGI that is intelligent in the real world. I
think some people on this list (incl Ben perhaps) might argue that for now -
for safety purposes but also due to costs - it might be better to build an
AGI that is intelligent in a simulated environment.
Ppl like Ben
--- On Thu, 9/4/08, Valentina Poletti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ppl like Ben argue that the concept/engineering aspect of intelligence is
independent of the type of environment. That is, given you understand how
to make it in a virtual environment you can then tarnspose that concept
into a real
I think I have an appropriate term for what I was trying to conceptualise.
It is that intelligence has not only to be embodied, but it has to be
EMBEDDED in the real world - that's the only way it can test whether
information about the world and real objects is really true. If you want to
