Mitchell Porter wrote:
> If anyone really wants to volunteer their services to seed AI,
> and is impatient for a set of marching orders, they always
> have the option of setting out on their own. In my opinion,
> the more people who do that the better, because the people who
> do that have to think about how the task-as-a-whole might be
> accomplished, and so they'll be better equipped to contribute
> if and when a seed-AI *team* does get off the ground.
> And if you need a blueprint to get started, CaTAI exists,
> even if the specs for Flare do not. I would urge the people
> who are keen to code *now* to think of a functional subsystem
> (i.e. a module) that a seed AI would have to have, and try
> to code such a subsystem, in the language of their choice.
> I don't see how the effort could be a waste, no matter what
Nice idea, but - from reading TPtS (for those who haven't read: it's
linked off of CaTAI, and basically the "so how do we do it?" part), it
sounds like the seed somehow requires Flare as Eleizer has dreamed it
up, to go beyond initial stages. (At least, crediting it with being
able to "create the potential for the timeline" that leads to an AI,
and similar comments, is pretty suggestive in that regard IMO.)
Without the specs for Flare, it is difficult to see how Flare solves
the problems it is credited with solving, yet the plan assumes that
Flare has solved them.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:59:49 MDT