Yes, but still too vague
-
-
-
Replying to @SurviveThrive2
Until you mentioned it I was not sure. Now I begin to think it's time.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
Oh ya! Score. Mobile interacting application? I think it would be practical and also funny in a good way to apply Micropsi 3 to a Roomba chassis coupled to a smart phone for NLP and internet access. iRobot is basically already doing this but not with the intent to study behavior.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SurviveThrive2
Roomba? And give Rodney Brooks the satisfaction that his failed subsumption architecture was finally good for anything except sabotaging AI with his embodimentalist cult?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
Lol! Hilarious. Looking forward to seeing what you do.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SurviveThrive2
At the moment I think it needs to live in VR for now.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
I can see that and it would work amazingly well. However, I have no explanation for what an AI character with novel behaviors to meet self survival goals in a virtual world is or would mean. For all intents and purposes it would be equivalent to life but entirely digital. Rights?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SurviveThrive2
We can build a second system that is generating the VR from video input.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
That would create the indeterminate vague nuances of reality to train and validate an AI capable of real world interactions. But it would truly be an entity existing in the cloud. Which we are anyway I guess. The transhumanism ‘live forever’ crowd will go nuts.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
It would be so awesome to get it to work...
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.