From: Richard Loosemore (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu Mar 16 2006 - 10:54:53 MST
This is sense??! I think not. The method suggested would take as long
as evolution took to get from amoeba to us. (A massively parallel
planetary computer versus a playstation?).
The sheer complexity of the internal structure of an AGI is so far
beyond what you would find in these game programs that it isn't even funny.
> Finally someone on this list is talking sense! Yes, if you combined the Havok
> physics engine with Spore, and maybe a evolutionary algorithm like the memetic
> algorithm (I believe Spore's evolutionary algorithms neglect the
> hueristic-driven local search component), it's possible to have AI to a
> limited capacity. I can't say with certianty whether this AI would be
> integrated and well-rounded enough to be called "general", but I can say with
> a great deal of faith that AGI and interactive entertianment applications will
> converge, possibly by the middle of the next decade.
> Patrick Dugan
>> ===== Original Message From Kevin Osborne <email@example.com> =====
>> the list has been a little quiet for a couple of days, so I thought
>> I'd gag up something I've been mulling over for a while...
>> I'm thinking it might be possible to develop evolving in-game
>> lifeforms of trivial general intelligence. and I think that the code
>> is not only possible today, but that it's already here.
>> let me explain my basis in contrast to the kurzweil/moravec notion of
>> replacing existing brain elements with inorganic equivalents to
>> produce a thinking being - with the contrast being that I see the
>> moravec approach as being top-down, while I believe there is a
>> distinct possibility of a bottom-up path-to-intelligence.
>> two more elements are needed for this position: evolution and reverse
>> engineering. of course the validity of a moravec-mind is needed as
>> well, but let's just make than an assumption for this case that can
>> (and I'm sure has) be discussed at length in other threads.
>> start with an immersive 3D gameworld with a simulation engine running
>> newtonian physics and genetic biology. there must be hundreds of
>> running codebases today that could be merged to provide this.
>> then, you reverse engineer the properties of an amoeba. you define
>> it's sequenced genome in logic, and you assign these properties and
>> abilities to in-game programmed objects, and then you let them loose
>> in a newtonian phyics based simworld with elements, seasons, sunlight
>> and resources. Remember that much of existing science, and physics
>> especially, is just reverse engineering; gravity existed long before
>> we named it so, as did carbon. We now have a very, very complete
>> understanding of the sub-cosmic and super-quantum realms; more than
>> enough to replicate organic existence with incredible realism.
>> now we know all the answers to how this world should behave, and how
>> this ameoba should develop, as it's already happened in our past; we
>> have a perfect history of it all preserved for comparison. if the
>> world starts to diverge markedly, you can tweak the ratios that
>> determine random changes via scarcity of resources, overpopulation,
>> climate change etc that drive evolutionary development. you can
>> program the basic imperatives of an amoeba; feed, grow, compete,
>> survive, divide. yes, the simulation is more complex than my basic
>> examples. but I think rigorous apllication of attention to detail
>> could overcome any inconsistencies or incompleteness.
>> if you build on this, again and again, in painstaking detail, you
>> should eventually get to something substantial. how many data points
>> are required to map the complete genetic evolutionary development from
>> an ameoba to a fieldmouse? alot? sure. an infinite amount? no. we have
>> those records, preserved for posterity in thin layers of earth; we can
>> trace every step, and then provide a mirror environment to reproduce
>> it. and if we can get from ameoba-like to mouse-like satisfactorily,
>> can we then progress our bottom-up approach from mouse-like to, well,
>> dog-like? monkey-like? man-like? you tell me.
>> if this is all sounding too outlandish or complex to simulate at the
>> technical level, there's a another 80's tech staple thats coming out
>> if it's own winter to help out: Procedural Generation (PG). This is
>> how the gameworld terrains of 80's titles generated their in-game
>> enivronments when gig's of animations on a dvd weren't an option. This
>> procedural approach says you don't have to create a world by hand; you
>> just set up the rules, press go, and let the world generate itself.
>> This is also the technique used by demoscene developers; check out
>> what 64k(!) of procedural generation can do here:
>> Wil Wright is the gaming legend is currently championing this, and
>> Spore is the game due out this year which is currently knocking my
>> socks off.
>> the first third of this video is a must-watch:
>> and a writeup of the game (and PG) is here:
>> Wright isn't just using PG for textures or tiles; he's also using it
>> for biomechanics and evolutionary characteristics like swimming,
>> walking, hunting, killing, eating and mating. None of the in-game
>> creatures in Spore are modelled prior to installing the game. every
>> single one evolves using an array of possible physical development
>> paths to come to life as completely unique organisms that execute
>> motile ability in a completely (un)natural way. If you haven't watch
>> the video linked above, I'd recommend doing so now.
>> Now the interesting part to all this is that when playing Spore,
>> you'll be competing against AI-generated evolving orgranisms; and I
>> think if the simulation is realistic enough, and the properties of the
>> organisms detailed enough, then we'll be starting to enter the
>> god-mode lobby of the SA you lot have been fascinated with lately.
>> It seems more and more that if we use sufficently comprehensive narrow
>> AI to generate
>> simulations of our in-historic-light-cone world that we can create
>> glimpes of real intelligence in our simulations.
>> There are growing examples of in-game AI generating AGI-like eruptions
>> of higher-intelligence-like behaviour. One the recent (elder scrolls
>> iv?) mmorpg games had testers walk into a in-game-evolved
>> previously-unvisited villiage where none of the townspeople would let
>> them in. turns out the villiage guards had gotten drunk and gone
>> hunting and gotten lost, and then bandits had raided the villiage.
>> each narrow-AI indivdiual guard|bandit|townsperson had combined to
>> generate an effect more like that which could be envisioned by a
>> higher intellect.
>> there's also this older example from 2001:
>> "This ability to discriminate has already produced some real surprises
>> for testers and creators alike during development. In one situation,
>> there was a creature that kept losing a stone-throwing game to another
>> creature. To get revenge, the first creature heated a rock, planted it
>> in the pile of stones to be thrown and then fell on the floor laughing
>> when its rival burned its hands. All this happened without
>> intervention from the player."
>> - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/1237848.stm
>> The next-gen consoles with their Cell processors are supposedly ideal
>> for the 'Procedural Syntheisis' needed to implement Procedural
>> Generation - does this mean the next glimmer of basic AGI will come
>>from the living room instead of the lab?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:56 MDT