Ben:So why is it worth repeating the point?Similarly, up till the moment
when the first astronauts walked on the moon,
you could have run around yelping that "no one has solved the problem of
how to make a person walk on the moon, all they've done is propose methods
that seem to have promise."
I repeated the details because I was challenged. (And unlike Richard, I do
answer challenges). The original point - a valid one, I think - is until
you've solved one AGI problem, you can't make any reasonable prediction as
to WHEN the rest will be solved and how much it will cost in resources. And
it's not worth much discussion.
AGI is different from moonwalking - that WAS successfully predicted by JFK
because they did indeed have technology reasonably likely to bring it about.
I would compare AGI predictions with predicting when we will have a
mind-reading machine, (except that personally, I think AGI is much harder).
Yes, you can have a bit of interesting discussion about that to begin with,
but then the subject, i.e. making predictions, exhausts itself, because
there are too many unknowns. Ditto here. No?
-------------------------------------------
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
