ONT Re: Inquiry Driven Learning Environments
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
IDLE. Discussion Note 3
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
JA = Jon Awbrey
TJ = Tom Johnston
JA: For this reason, the components of intelligence that I take
as high-priority tasks for AI are not necessarily, at least,
not merely, those which are central to our characteristically
human way of understanding the world around us but those which
would reward us with the greatest non-redundant gains from being
extended by artificial means.
TJ: Let us not be too hasty in making this distinction (said tongue in cheek,
of course, given my own hasty "let's get going" arguments of another thread
we are spinning). Surely we should continue basic research into how a system
with a hundred billion components, averaging three thousand connections apiece,
responding to the analog signal of a build-up of electrical potential created by
the passage of potassium atoms through cell wall channels, emitting a digital
signal of firing a discharge or not doing so, can do all the wonderful stuff
it does? Surely deciding which avenues of investigation would have the
best pay-off is premature?
Tom,
Sure. I think I covered that with the "not merely".
This remark, calling attention to what is sometimes
called the "intelligence amplifire" (good typo!) or
"intelligence augmentation" emphasis in AI, was made
in a setting where people had started to forget about
the fact that this was one of the initial approaches to
the whole field that we now call AI. One of the things
that I have been stressing since waybackwhen is that we
are likely to need some augmental software extensions
just in order to comprehend complex dynamic systems,
such as the especially fascinating case that you
mention. It's like the man (WBY) almost said:
"All rising to a great place will be loopy."
Remind me to tell you about my hike up Diamondhead.
Got the T-shirt and everything. And some blisters.
Jon Awbrey
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o