Paul Hughes wrote:
>
> **Since no one has actually built or designed a theoretical human-level AI, how can
> anyone possibly claim what it takes to build one? This seems completely absurd
> to the point of self-contradiction! As so many are fond of saying around here -
> extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
Hello-oo-o? http://pobox.com/~sentience/AI_design.temp.html?
> To re-iterate the obvious, until
> someone can prove otherwise, a human-level AI will have to equal the complexity of
> the human brain.
Not really - there's a lot of complexity that's unnecessary, but can't be evolved away because there's no gradual path from the local optimum to the global optimum. Like the blind spot on the retina, sort of. Or the relative complexity of an Interim Goal System, compared to a human limbic system and the complex, photon-like(*) emotion-and-worldmodel event-loop.
(*) Photon - magnetic field gives rise to electrical field, electrical field gives rise to magnetic field...
--
sentience@pobox.com Eliezer S. Yudkowsky
http://pobox.com/~sentience/tmol-faq/meaningoflife.html
Running on BeOS Typing in Dvorak Programming with Patterns
Voting for Libertarians Heading for Singularity There Is A Better Way