Slashdot Mirror

The Cognitive Machines Group @ the MIT Media Lab under Deb Roy seem to be on the right track. Steve Grand's work is interesting as well.

robotic urang utang

There's a good book on it's development.

I agree completely but I think you have the pop culture reference wrong. Is it just me or does Lucy bear a striking resemblance to Chucky from Child's Play?

This'll get modded as redundant, as well it should. But... holy crap:

http://www.cyberlife-research.com/diary/0104.htm

Lucy's home page is an even better place for technical details, including an anatomical overview and scrapbook pictures

Lucy's home page is an even better place for technical details, including an anatomical overview and scrapbook pictures

Lucy's home page is an even better place for technical details, including an anatomical overview and scrapbook pictures

It may be that he hasn't spent the time and effort to put into words what he's been praticing and developing.

He doesn't have enough time to write a single academic paper, but has managed to "dash out" two books? That theory doesn't hold water, IMHO.

Being someone that sounds like an abstract sequential thinker, it's likely not far from the truth that he probably comes up with many ideas and designs and simply has no explanation for how they work.

He knows they do, but couldn't explain it without much more time spent on the explanation than the furthering of the design.

Genius with a touch of insanity, it's what great thinkers are made of.

No, perhaps some "great thinkers" are like that, but many are perfectly sane people who are smart and interested enough in a specific goal to try to solve a problem. Others might be driven by greed, love, a gun pointed at them. Who knows? Your vague generalisation covers up the variety and complexity of human intelligence and don't help anyone.

I checked out his website here. He seems to spend a lot of time explaining (at a shallow level) what he does if he's really someone who can explain it. He seems to me more like someone who (believes he) has some great ideas but doesn't want to share them yet.

That's just fine, and I say a big "congrats" to him for being able to fund his own research. My point was to counter the reviewer's argument that this kind of private research should be publically funded. I don't see Steve Grand making that argument, by the way.

The attempt to create some sort of intelligence without a body sort of takes the Socratic idea of absolutes ("we recognize a 'chair' because it reflects the features of a 'perfect chair'") to an absurd end.

I think that Stephen Grand got it right when he concluded that in addition to nerves and muscles, the "chemical soup" that drives us (hunger, fear and lust... the good stuff) is also essential to creating artificial biology.

Then again, there really hasn't been much progress on Lucy since Steve got his grant a couple months ago, and Norns are pretty much the most irritating "artificial lifeform" ever invented (only my six your old can stand them). So who am I to say?

The attempt to create some sort of intelligence without a body sort of takes the Socratic idea of absolutes ("we recognize a 'chair' because it reflects the features of a 'perfect chair'") to an absurd end.

I think that Stephen Grand got it right when he concluded that in addition to nerves and muscles, the "chemical soup" that drives us (hunger, fear and lust... the good stuff) is also essential to creating artificial biology.

Then again, there really hasn't been much progress on Lucy since Steve got his grant a couple months ago, and Norns are pretty much the most irritating "artificial lifeform" ever invented (only my six your old can stand them). So who am I to say?

The attempt to create some sort of intelligence without a body sort of takes the Socratic idea of absolutes ("we recognize a 'chair' because it reflects the features of a 'perfect chair'") to an absurd end.

I think that Stephen Grand got it right when he concluded that in addition to nerves and muscles, the "chemical soup" that drives us (hunger, fear and lust... the good stuff) is also essential to creating artificial biology.

Then again, there really hasn't been much progress on Lucy since Steve got his grant a couple months ago, and Norns are pretty much the most irritating "artificial lifeform" ever invented (only my six your old can stand them). So who am I to say?

The attempt to create some sort of intelligence without a body sort of takes the Socratic idea of absolutes ("we recognize a 'chair' because it reflects the features of a 'perfect chair'") to an absurd end.

I think that Stephen Grand got it right when he concluded that in addition to nerves and muscles, the "chemical soup" that drives us (hunger, fear and lust... the good stuff) is also essential to creating artificial biology.

Then again, there really hasn't been much progress on Lucy since Steve got his grant a couple months ago, and Norns are pretty much the most irritating "artificial lifeform" ever invented (only my six your old can stand them). So who am I to say?

http://www.cyberlife-research.com/Lucy/index.htm