From: Michael Roy Ames (michaelroyames@yahoo.com)
Date: Wed Jan 01 2003 - 09:24:50 MST
Dear Ben,
You wrote:
>
> It's a peripheral point, but one that should be clarified: Colin's
level 2
> is NOT like an expert system, because typical expert systems do not
learn
> based on experience at all. They just do logical reasoning based on a
fixed
> set of rules, encoded by humans. It's more accurate to say that his
level 2
> is like conventional machine-learning AI (feedforward NN's,
statistical
> learning systems, GP, etc.). [snip]
>
I guess it all depends on how you define learning... but I didn't really
(and don't) want to bandy definitions. I understand your point. My
point is we don't have AGI until we have a system that can be shown a
set of learning techniques, which it then applies to new learning
problems. Also it would have to be able to analogize on those
techniques, and mutate them, and come up with techniques of its own.
The Semesters 1 thru 4 may successfully be passed by an non-AGI, but...
so what? It would be just another Deep Blue. This does not invalidate
the need for elementary lessons being needed by an AGI. (I know you
know this, I'm just saying ;>)
Michael Roy Ames
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:41 MDT