From: Stuart Armstrong (dragondreaming@googlemail.com)
Date: Fri Feb 27 2009 - 04:36:16 MST
>> That's not Eliezer's point. He's taking issue with your contention
>> that AI is solveable for $1 quadrillion. It would be like Victorian
>> scientist in 1830 saying that "heavier than air flight is solevable
>> for such an amount" or "predicting the weather ten weeks in advance is
>> solveable for such an amount". We don't really have much of a clue of
>> the feasability of AI, so all these cost estimates are
>> pretty much guesswork.
>
> It doesn't need to be guesswork. My research is focused on answering the question. http://cs.fit.edu/~mmahoney/compression/rationale.html
>From which I quote:
"Will This Benchmark Lead to AI?
That is not known. I believe that..."
You might get a precise cost for a particualr method, but you need
something more: a clear justification that that method will lead to
AI.
Your section Text Compression is Equivalent to AI makes compression
similar to a GLUT, which is a fantastically inefficient method of
creating an AI.
Stuart
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:01:04 MDT