From: Alan Grimes (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sat Jan 26 2002 - 11:28:46 MST
Ben Goertzel wrote:
> For sure, you need a lot of RAM. You need a lot of knowledge readily
> accessible -- not just atomic bits of knowledge but combinations of
> and relations between atomic bits of knowledge.... And each of these
> bits of knowledge needs to be continually re-configuring itself in
> terms of the new bits of knowledge that have come into the mind, and
> the changes in other bits of knowledge in the mind. This does require
> a lot of memory and processing power, and my strong sense is that
> it ain't gonna run on a Commodore VIC-20.
A dude on email@example.com has proposed a learning system that
would express what would ammount to a LOGARIHMIC growth function of
memory unilization as a function of knowlege.
The function would be something like:
[Memory required] = LOG_k([Total Knowlege])
I can't say I know what K would be; It would likley depend on the design
of the system employed.
His proposal was based on a notion of "abstraction" where a higher-level
abstractions would be specified, like FORTH words, by simpler
abstractions. As these higer level abstractions would overlap to a great
extent, the cost of additional abstractions would decrease as more base
abstractions become available.
In other words, for a linear increase in memory, an exponential increase
in knowlege should be possible.
The process for automating this would probably solve the translation
-- DOS LIVES! MWAHAHAHAHA http://users.rcn.com/alangrimes/ <my website.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:37 MDT