From: James Rogers (jamesr@best.com)
Date: Thu Aug 14 2003 - 12:22:12 MDT
Ben Goertzel wrote:
> James Rogers wrote:
> > In all likelihood there is probably
> > only one pragmatic solution to AGI surrounded by a space of
> > credible close approximations.
>
> My intuition differs ... I suspect there are many
> qualitatively different solutions, corresponding to different
> sorts of minds.
My view wasn't really an "intuitive" one, it was more a pragmatic economic
analysis.
I think it is quite rational to assume that there is only one theoretical
solution in the general abstract. With respect to real implementations, the
efficacy of a particular design will drop quite rapidly as approximations of the
theoretical ideal become poorer. Therefore, I would say that it is a reasonable
assumption that all high-efficacy designs will look quite similar to each other.
Yes, there is a huge range of qualitatively different solutions that will work
in theory. But given finite resource limitations, most of these solutions will
be essentially worthless when competing with high-efficacy designs. Most
functional differences between high-efficacy AGIs will be window dressing.
So to put it another way: You can design a theoretically viable AGI in any
number of ways, but when you throw IQ/$ into the equation (a real-world
viability factor) one type of AGI design will completely overshadow all others.
Unless, of course, all the competing designs really suck (i.e. the prevailing
market at the moment).
Cheers,
-James Rogers
jamesr@best.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:42 MDT