Hi, > Just my personal opinion...but it appears that the "exponential technology > growth chart", which is used in many of the briefings, does not include > AI/AGI. It is processing centric. When you include AI/AGI the "exponential > technology curve" flattens out in the coming years (5-7) and becomes part of > a normal S curve of development. While computer power and processing will > increase exponentially (as nanotechnology grows) the area of AI will need > more time to develop. > > I would be interested in your thoughts.
I think this is because progress toward general AI has been difficult to quantify in the past, and looks to remain difficult to quantify into the future... I am uncertain as to the extent to which this problem can be worked around, though. Let me introduce an analogy problem "Understanding the operation of the brain better and better" is to "scanning the brain with higher and higher spatiotemporal accuracy", as "Creating more and more powerful AGI" is to what? ;-) The point is that understanding the brain is also a nebulous and hard-to-quantify goal, but we make charts for it by treating "brain scan accuracy" as a more easily quantifiable proxy variable. What's a comparable proxy variable for AGI? Suggestions welcome! -- Ben Ben ------------------------------------------- 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
