--- Richard Loosemore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Matt Mahoney wrote: > > Just what do you want out of AGI? Something that thinks like a person or > > something that does what you ask it to? > > Either will do: your suggestion achieves neither. > > If I ask your non-AGI the following question: "How can I build an AGI > that can think at a speed that is 1000 times faster than the speed of > human thought?" it will say: > > "Hi, my name is Ben and I just picked up your question. I would > love to give you the answer but you have to send $20 million > and give me a few years". > > That is not the answer I would expect of an AGI. A real AGI would do > original research to solve the problem, and solve it *itself*. > > Isn't this, like, just too obvious for words? ;-)
Your question is not well formed. Computers can already think 1000 times faster than humans for things like arithmetic. Does your AGI also need to know how to feed your dog? Or should it guess and build it anyway? I would think such a system would be dangerous. I expect a competitive message passing network to improve over time. Early versions will work like an interactive search engine. You may get web pages or an answer from another human in real time, and you may later receive responses to your persistent query. If your question can be matched to an expert in some domain that happens to be on the net, then it gets routed there. Google already does this. For example, if you type an address, it gives you a map and offers driving directions. If you ask it "how many teaspoons in a cubic parsec?" it will compute the answer (try it). It won't answer every question, but with 1000 times more computing power than Google, I expect there will be many more domain experts. I expect as hardware gets more powerful, peers will get better at things like recognizing people in images, writing programs, and doing original research. I don't claim that I can solve these problems. I do claim that there is an incentive to provide these services and that the problems are not intractable given powerful hardware, and therefore the services will be provided. There are two things to make the problem easier. First, peers will have access to a vast knowledge source that does not exist today. Second, peers can specialize in a narrow domain, e.g. only recognize one particular person in images, or write software or do research in some obscure, specialized field. Is this labor intensive? Yes. A $1 quadrillion system won't just build itself. People will build it because they will get back more value than they put in. -- Matt Mahoney, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------- singularity Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/11983/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/11983/ Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=4007604&id_secret=98631122-712fa4 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
