Difference between revisions of "List of breakthroughs plausibly needed for AGI"
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
see https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5WECpYABCT62TJrhY/will-ai-undergo-discontinuous-progress#The_Conceptual_Arguments | see https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5WECpYABCT62TJrhY/will-ai-undergo-discontinuous-progress#The_Conceptual_Arguments | ||
| + | |||
| + | this isn't the same thing, but it's doing a similar sort of thing of asking "how will AGI be different from current ML systems?" http://www.foldl.me/2018/conceptual-issues-ai-safety-paradigmatic-gap/#potential-paradigmatic-changes-in-ai | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
Revision as of 22:39, 21 May 2020
- Looking at things like The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences and Judea Pearl's work on causality and trying to estimate how many insights are required to build an AGI.[1]
this isn't the same thing, but it's doing a similar sort of thing of asking "how will AGI be different from current ML systems?" http://www.foldl.me/2018/conceptual-issues-ai-safety-paradigmatic-gap/#potential-paradigmatic-changes-in-ai
