Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by olsher 871 days ago
Daniel Olsher here - thought I'd jump in.

As a threshold comment, every element of this (in theory and in practice) is entirely reproducible via the materials already provided in this paper and in the peer-reviewed literature, including AAAI, ICDM, KDD, Neural Networks, IEEE Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence, Cognitive Science, IEEE HumTech, and other venues.

There is a wealth of examples in those papers that you can compute and verify on your own. In the proof paper, I've added cites every time a particular area of performance is discussed. My recommendation would be to find those areas that seem most confounding to you and then read the corresponding papers in order to see how we handle them.

Going back to the proof paper, that paper provides a standalone proof of AGI achievement, as per its title. You can verify this proof entirely with your own resources.

The structure of the proof is simple; starting with the literature on intelligence as a base, we first derive the properties that any AGI must/must not have and then show that our formalism indeed holds all of those properties (and does not have properties that it's not allowed to have). Because the necessary properties have been met, AGI has been achieved. People often want to add a 'real-world realization' requirement as part of the concept of achievement, which is not required, but this too is met via the examples given in the papers and many years of real-world use of this technology within the US Government.

The structure of the proof is very simple, and is fairly obviously valid and sound, so if the premises are true then the conclusion (successful AGI achievement) must also be true.

Given this, you really only have three possible paths: show that the structure of my proof is not valid and/or sound, show that my derivation of the AGI properties is somehow incorrect, or show that my computation formalism doesn't have the properties just stated. If you can't do any of that, then I've met my burden and you have no rational basis to reject my conclusion.