From: Ben Goertzel (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sun May 05 2002 - 18:30:17 MDT
> Peter Voss wrote:
> > I generally agree with Ben's response to Eli's review.
> > Specifically, I agree that Real AI (including Seed AI) will require a
> > simpler, cleaner design rather than the kind of complexity that
> Eli seems to
> > call for. Really understanding what general intelligence is,
> and what its
> > essentials are, is the key to an effective implementation.
> Um... DGI *is* the simpler, cleaner, bare-bones design based on really
> understanding general intelligence and its essentials.
Eliezer, your DGI paper absolutely does NOT give a design for an AGI.
It gives a very abstract, high-level theory of mind.
There is no *particular idea* in the paper that is significantly original,
as far as I can tell; but I think it's a nice summary of some very important
aspects of modern cognitive science, from an general AI perspective.
As Pascal wrote in the intro to one of his works, "Do not complain there is
nothing new here. The *arrangement* is new."
The Novamente book manuscript I gave you is tremendously more detailed than
your DGI paper; the DGI paper is more on the level of my previous books on
the theory of mind, which were basically conceptual and could have been used
to inspire 1000 different varieties of AGI system.
However, even this book manuscript is far from a detailed design. Most of
Novamente *has* been designed on the detailed level -- but not all -- but
those detailed design docs are not in the book.
-- Ben G
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:38 MDT