From: CyTG (cytg.net@gmail.com)
Date: Sat Jul 19 2008 - 07:36:12 MDT
"Also, "merge" is not well defined. If by "merge" you mean that the agents
cooperate to the greatest extent possible, then this is still a form of
trade. If their utility functions differ, then some negotiation is required
to reach an agreement on their combination. Even if the agents are
identical, then their utility functions will differ if both agents are
motivated by self interest, for different selves."
- Imagine merge. Okai this is how I think about it. With lack of better
understanding and absence of a true gai I imagine it to be something like
this
1. Fred Hoyles The Black Cloud.
It's reasonable to assume a future intelligence to be massively parralel and
that entire wholesome cognetive domains are processed independently from the
whole.
2. Splicing of neural nets.
You may have experience with practical AI of today or not, but lets take
neural nets for example basicly we're talking classification and function
approximation. It's viable that you have two seperate domains, two seperate
trained nets and now you find that you'd like to splice these together so
the resulting net is the sum of a and b (This is what i call neural
algebra(tm), wich could be of big help with future neural implants for
cognetive enhancements as well).
So that is how I imagine merge. A subset of logic circuits simply enriched
with a new knowledge domain.
"It is to the advantage of both agents to share and redistribute information
to avoid redundancy and allow specialization. I expect cooperation to happen
because cooperating groups will have a selective advantage over
non-cooperators. But is this trading or merging? Do the employees of a
company trade or merge? Do the cells in your body trade or merge, or
something in between?"
- But it sounds like someone has to agree to die! For the better good of
course and future generations of course. You're assuming that a prime
directive of an AI is to win this race <I expect cooperation to happen
because cooperating groups will have a selective advantage over
non-cooperators>, is that it?
Why would an AI merge? It's better to be assimilated than to be wiped out?
Left Behind? Forgotten?
/Cy.
On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 4:54 AM, Matt Mahoney <matmahoney@yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- On Thu, 7/17/08, CyTG <cytg.net@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > If the intelligence of an selfimproving AI is on the rise,
> > exponentially, why would it ever wanna 'merge' with another AI?
>
> We don't know that self improvement is possible except as an evolutionary
> process. As discussed earlier, we lack even a mathematical model of
> deliberate self improvement, as well as a means for an agent to test another
> agent of greater intelligence. Even in simplified environments, we know of
> no classes of problems which are provably hard to solve but easy to verify.
>
> Also, "merge" is not well defined. If by "merge" you mean that the agents
> cooperate to the greatest extent possible, then this is still a form of
> trade. If their utility functions differ, then some negotiation is required
> to reach an agreement on their combination. Even if the agents are
> identical, then their utility functions will differ if both agents are
> motivated by self interest, for different selves.
>
> It is to the advantage of both agents to share and redistribute information
> to avoid redundancy and allow specialization. I expect cooperation to happen
> because cooperating groups will have a selective advantage over
> non-cooperators. But is this trading or merging? Do the employees of a
> company trade or merge? Do the cells in your body trade or merge, or
> something in between?
>
> -- Matt Mahoney, matmahoney@yahoo.com
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:01:03 MDT