4 ms·
Do you care to cite your assertions? The dichotomy you are referring to doesn't exist. Do you have a reliable source that says that there are two broad approach
by computerex 7y ago
Do you care to cite your assertions? The dichotomy you are referring to doesn't exist. Do you have a reliable source that says that there are two broad approaches to AGI, behavior driven and biology driven?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embodied_cognition https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embodied_cognition
There is widespread consensus that embodiment is significant for AGI. Modern approaches to AGI tend to be biologically inspired.
OpenAI five is not even remotely in the same class as an AGI system.
- solidasparagus 7y agoI doubt I can find something to cite - it's an observation that I didn't think was particularly questionable. We have researchers like OpenAI trying to move towards AGI by advancing RL through specific applications. Others like OpenWorm are trying to mimic the building blocks of life. Of course biology inspires all AI, but given the nascent state of AGI, it seems like you have to choose between those two approaches. And if we're being pedantic, can you cite your claim that there "is widespread consensus that embodiment is significant for AGI"? I find it hard to believe that there is widespread consensus about anything around AGI.