From: Mikko Särelä (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Sep 09 2005 - 04:11:28 MDT
On Thu, 8 Sep 2005, Phil Goetz wrote:
> --- Michael Wilson <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Indeed I can quite easily state that no causally chaotic system is
> > stable under self-modification, and that all such systems will
> > rapidly disintigrate or fall into a causally clean attractor
> > on gaining the ability to self-modify. If you don't accept
> > that an AGI based on 'Complex Adaptive' low-level mechanisms
> > will inevitably fall into a 'non-Complex' attractor, then show
> > us such a system that actually works.
> Actually, the main value of complex systems studies may be in
> informing us that this chaotic regime is where our system is
> most productive, and in providing us with the math needed to
> keep it from either "disintegrating" into randomness or falling
> into a stable point or periodic attractor.
Or if you are trying to keep the system from becoming complex (and believe
that such a system can be intelligent) to be able to tell, whether your
system is complex or not.
-- Mikko Särelä "I find that good security people are D&D players" - Bruce Schneier
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat May 18 2013 - 04:00:47 MDT