[ExI] Oxford scientists edge toward quantum PC with 10b qubits.

[Richard Loosemore]

John Clark wrote:
> On Feb 2, 2011, at 11:56 AM, Richard Loosemore wrote:
> 
>> Every few months, it seems, there is another announcement about some 
>> project, which the press writes up as "Could it be that AI is on the 
>> brink of a breakthrough?". Can you imagine how indignant you would be 
>> if you saw those same stories being written 20 years ago? 
> 
> Forget 20 years, just a little over 10 years ago I started hearing about 
> a new thing called "Google" that was supposed to be a breakthru in AI, 
> and it turned out those stories were big understatements and Google has 
> changed our world.   

Irrelevant.  Google is narrow AI, not AGI.

>> I am trying to get enough funding to make what I consider to be real 
>> progress in the field, but doing that is almost impossible
> 
> I guess if venture capitalists were impressed with your idea they were 
> not very impressed, and that's what they need to be before they start 
> betting their own money on something.

Venture capitalists have as much understanding of AGI as you do.

They also understand what venture capital funding is for, which you 
apparently do not.  They do not fund research, they fund products.


>> Meanwhile, if I had had the resources of the Watson project a decade 
>> ago, we might be talking with real (and safe) AGI systems right now.
> 
> Real probably not, safe definitely not. There is no way you can 
> guarantee that something smarter than you will always do what you want. 

Yes there is.  You may not understand how, but that does not change the 
theory itself.


Richard Loosemore