<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Artificial General Intelligence 2008 Summary</title>
	<atom:link href="http://singinst.org/blog/2008/03/09/artificial-general-intelligence-2008-summary/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://singinst.org/blog/2008/03/09/artificial-general-intelligence-2008-summary/</link>
	<description>The Singularity Institute exists to confront the challenge of powerful AI, both the opportunity and the risk.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Sep 2011 10:21:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Sutherland</title>
		<link>http://singinst.org/blog/2008/03/09/artificial-general-intelligence-2008-summary/#comment-55851</link>
		<dc:creator>John Sutherland</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Jun 2008 01:08:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.singinst.org/blog/2008/03/09/artificial-general-intelligence-2008-summary/#comment-55851</guid>
		<description>I guess nobody read it,  Oh well....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I guess nobody read it,  Oh well&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jerry Rude</title>
		<link>http://singinst.org/blog/2008/03/09/artificial-general-intelligence-2008-summary/#comment-52960</link>
		<dc:creator>Jerry Rude</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 May 2008 18:38:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.singinst.org/blog/2008/03/09/artificial-general-intelligence-2008-summary/#comment-52960</guid>
		<description>Hi Folks, Had anybody read a concept of HNeT (Holographic Neural Technology) ? Does it make progress in AI research and practical implementation?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Folks, Had anybody read a concept of HNeT (Holographic Neural Technology) ? Does it make progress in AI research and practical implementation?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Singularity Institute Blog : Blog Archive : Video from the AGI-08 Conference</title>
		<link>http://singinst.org/blog/2008/03/09/artificial-general-intelligence-2008-summary/#comment-49632</link>
		<dc:creator>The Singularity Institute Blog : Blog Archive : Video from the AGI-08 Conference</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 06:28:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.singinst.org/blog/2008/03/09/artificial-general-intelligence-2008-summary/#comment-49632</guid>
		<description>[...] Mike Rudolf on Artificial General Intelligence 2008 Summary [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Mike Rudolf on Artificial General Intelligence 2008 Summary [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Rudolf</title>
		<link>http://singinst.org/blog/2008/03/09/artificial-general-intelligence-2008-summary/#comment-49190</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Rudolf</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 May 2008 19:29:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.singinst.org/blog/2008/03/09/artificial-general-intelligence-2008-summary/#comment-49190</guid>
		<description>The problem of &quot;selling&quot; AI is that the ultimate reward is long term.  Selling is still a provinence of short term Human to Human.  

People in government only benefit from short term ideas, and while they might be happy to listen to the potentials and the dangers of AI, their &quot;vision Horizon&quot; is still less than the curvature of the earth----not around it.

Their time horizons are limited to the time horizon of elections.

Of course, looked at objectively,and considering the rate of change of technology, the opportunity cost of not looking long term in this case is huge.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The problem of &#8220;selling&#8221; AI is that the ultimate reward is long term.  Selling is still a provinence of short term Human to Human.  </p>
<p>People in government only benefit from short term ideas, and while they might be happy to listen to the potentials and the dangers of AI, their &#8220;vision Horizon&#8221; is still less than the curvature of the earth&#8212;-not around it.</p>
<p>Their time horizons are limited to the time horizon of elections.</p>
<p>Of course, looked at objectively,and considering the rate of change of technology, the opportunity cost of not looking long term in this case is huge.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeffrey Herrlich</title>
		<link>http://singinst.org/blog/2008/03/09/artificial-general-intelligence-2008-summary/#comment-40134</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeffrey Herrlich</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 09:49:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.singinst.org/blog/2008/03/09/artificial-general-intelligence-2008-summary/#comment-40134</guid>
		<description>&quot;So why is AI still a hard sell to many in government and biz?&quot;

As just a guess, it&#039;s because they believe that AGI is impossible or is at least very distant in the future - but that is wrong, of course. So, I guess they assume that money is better spent elsewhere at present. It may also be because the PTB, haven&#039;t considered the consequences to their logical extreme - the extinction of humanity and its future potential. There has basically been a subtle underlying &quot;AI winter&quot; since the first series of unfulfilled promises and unrealistic expectations. I suppose it&#039;s not totally fair to blame the gov and buisnesses for their skepticism - it&#039;s simply very dangerous excessive skepticism. We need to make it apparent to them that AGI is monumentally important - right now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;So why is AI still a hard sell to many in government and biz?&#8221;</p>
<p>As just a guess, it&#8217;s because they believe that AGI is impossible or is at least very distant in the future &#8211; but that is wrong, of course. So, I guess they assume that money is better spent elsewhere at present. It may also be because the PTB, haven&#8217;t considered the consequences to their logical extreme &#8211; the extinction of humanity and its future potential. There has basically been a subtle underlying &#8220;AI winter&#8221; since the first series of unfulfilled promises and unrealistic expectations. I suppose it&#8217;s not totally fair to blame the gov and buisnesses for their skepticism &#8211; it&#8217;s simply very dangerous excessive skepticism. We need to make it apparent to them that AGI is monumentally important &#8211; right now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joseph Hunkins</title>
		<link>http://singinst.org/blog/2008/03/09/artificial-general-intelligence-2008-summary/#comment-39824</link>
		<dc:creator>Joseph Hunkins</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Mar 2008 01:16:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.singinst.org/blog/2008/03/09/artificial-general-intelligence-2008-summary/#comment-39824</guid>
		<description>The inventon of a conscious computer is likely to create more value in spinoff technologies than all human activites past, present, and future combined.  So why is AI still a hard sell to many in government and biz?    Since the return is effectively going to be nearly infinite on the investment, even the smallest possibility of success should command huge outlays for AI projects.    Meanwhile we spend 550 billion on military projects?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The inventon of a conscious computer is likely to create more value in spinoff technologies than all human activites past, present, and future combined.  So why is AI still a hard sell to many in government and biz?    Since the return is effectively going to be nearly infinite on the investment, even the smallest possibility of success should command huge outlays for AI projects.    Meanwhile we spend 550 billion on military projects?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: é</title>
		<link>http://singinst.org/blog/2008/03/09/artificial-general-intelligence-2008-summary/#comment-37727</link>
		<dc:creator>é</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:38:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.singinst.org/blog/2008/03/09/artificial-general-intelligence-2008-summary/#comment-37727</guid>
		<description>[...] Goertzel summarizes AGI-08. Also check out the interview with Ben @ Fast Forward Radio [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Goertzel summarizes AGI-08. Also check out the interview with Ben @ Fast Forward Radio [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeffrey Herrlich</title>
		<link>http://singinst.org/blog/2008/03/09/artificial-general-intelligence-2008-summary/#comment-37472</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeffrey Herrlich</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Mar 2008 23:09:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.singinst.org/blog/2008/03/09/artificial-general-intelligence-2008-summary/#comment-37472</guid>
		<description>As a matter of reality, I think that some form of government involvement is unavoidable. From a strategic POV, I think it would be best if we/SIAI seek to actively engage and guide the US government on matters of AGI safety. Even if this may seem unpalatable to some people, I think it would ultimately be more dangerous to try and keep the US government out. We need to build bridges that effectively convey the gravity of the situation - and why only a specific type of AGI architecture is acceptable. I&#039;m glad to see that SIAI seems to be moving in this direction.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As a matter of reality, I think that some form of government involvement is unavoidable. From a strategic POV, I think it would be best if we/SIAI seek to actively engage and guide the US government on matters of AGI safety. Even if this may seem unpalatable to some people, I think it would ultimately be more dangerous to try and keep the US government out. We need to build bridges that effectively convey the gravity of the situation &#8211; and why only a specific type of AGI architecture is acceptable. I&#8217;m glad to see that SIAI seems to be moving in this direction.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

