I started that journey 5 years and half ago, I believe? Or was it 6?
Early on, I’ve been caught by the IBM Watson showcase, and, as I was looking for a moon shot project, the conclusion was easy: “I’ll be the one making the next significant step in A.I.”
Well, quickly I figured out those deep neural nets were just statistical classifier. I started to look for a deeper truth: starting from neurobiology, to go erratically between math, philosophy, psychology and back to neurology… Well, it was just wondering around about a deeper truth that I could add to the stack of AI, with or without deep learners.
But math is a selective creation based on deeper truths, neurobiology is just description, psychology is built on moving sand making it hard to distinguish speculation from truth (e.g. Stanford experiment) and assert on their metrics, neurology doesn’t know what to measure and what to account for, they’re still trying to find the most suitable tools, philosophy has been solved by Ludwig von Wittgenstein in a Gödel’s incompleteness fashion.
Well, there are my conclusion: I have no large truth to seek for, there’s no big answer or great principle. Everything is but a bunch of aggregated adaptable functions, with a quasi-deterministic architecture that gives to everyone a close enough similarity that they can develop language and express ideas on common assumptions.
Within this paradigm, we can make an intelligence that understand Humans. The real challenge of AGI is to copy an unknown architecture from a large variety of samples and a large space of possibilities.
Without this paradigm, we can make plenty of new intelligences but with no hope to communicate efficiently with them and, therefore, bend their behavior in a highly useful manneer.
As I’ve seen so many great modern discoveries made by trying to explain the human brain (logic gates, truth tables, automaton, Turing machine, video games UI, etc.), I still took the journey to, myself, produce something great while trying to rationalize the mind in some principles matching my intellectual capacities (a.k.a. chasing the dragon).
I’ve produced many interesting reflections, but no great invention though. I still try to see the peak of this problem, but I obviously cannot grasp it.
Because the solution of this problem is encoded in a higher language, as complex, incompressible and diverse as it can be: this language is the structure and the dynamic of the brain itself.
We’re still at least one evolution away to grasp that problem: so far none can register a full brain architecture as a projection in each functional part of its own brain, and guarantee that those projections are sufficient to describe a brain.
So, yeah, I don’t really feel like solving that problem, even helped with tools like cloud quantum computers, I’m not the one who will ever deliver the solution to AGI and that has never been the point of this blog.
But being a cynical person looking for some nice fish while hunting the mythical one, is really not anymore how I feel I should lose my time.
It finally clipped together, after so many posts talking about a developing platform, I won’t make AGI but I can make the tools to empower great thinkers with ready-to-use simulations; to compare and advert the best results and the people behind those results; to have a wide-integration with today’s electronics; to provide a gamified experience of what AGI development should be from its large possibilities and a sense of wonder; to create connection and community mindset around the AGI question; and, even if we fail to make it, to have something to pass to the next generation and keep the passion burning.
So there it is… I’m gonna put together this blog, and mostly a lot of personal notes, to try to produce this AGI platform. It is at a draft stage, so it’s still gonna take a long time before a first release.
Though the Wright Brothers didn’t make it because they were the most brilliant engineers, but because they had a huge fan and strings to quickly test ideas.