On 10/22/06, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I know you must be frustrated with fund raising, but investor
> relunctance is understandable from the perspective that for decades
> now there has always been someone who said we're N years from full
> blown AI, and then N years passed with nothing but narrow AI progress.
> Of course, someone will end up being right at some point.
Sure ... and most of the time, the narrow AI progress achieved via
AI-directed funding has not even been significant, or useful....
However, it seems to me that the degree of skepticism about AGI goes beyond
what is rational. I attribute this to an unconscious reluctance on the part
of most humans to conceive that **we**, the mighty and glorious human rulers
of the Earth, could really be superseded by mere software programs created
by mere mortal humans. Even humans who are willing to accept this
theoretically, don't want to accept this pragmatically, as something that
may occur in the near term.
After all, there seems to be a lot more cash around for nanotech than for
AGI, and that is quite unproven technology also -- and technology that is a
hell of a lot riskier and more expensive to develop than AGI software. It
is not the case that investors are across the board equally skeptical of all
unproven technologies -- AI seems to be viewed with an extra, and
undeserved, degree of skepticism.
Some speculations:
That might be due to AI efforts being much older than nanotech
efforts. Not that scientists weren't doing interesting things with
materials 50 years ago, but nanotechnology as recognizable field seems
much younger than AI. In other words, AI has been missing its supreme
goal for longer.
Also, investors might enjoy relating to the physical aspects of
nanotech. Creating physical product, shipping quantities, etc.
> For the record, at the same event, Peter Voss of Adaptive AI
> ( http://www.adaptiveai.com/) stated his company would have AGI in 2
> years. I *think* he qualified it as being at the level of a 10 year
> old child. Help me out on that, if you remember.
I could help you out, but I won't, because I believe Peter asked those of us
at that meeting **not** to publicly discuss the details of his presentation
there (although, frankly, the details were pretty scanty). If he wants to
chip in some more info himself, he is welcome to...
I don't think this overall point is private since it's on the web site
that I found through his job posting:
http://adaptiveai.com/company/opportunities.htm
"to create, within 3 years, fully functioning, commercializable
high-level AGI technology"
But I understand your point of letting him be the one to contribute
more details if he desires.
-Chuck
-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
