> Going head-to-head with Google with a project involving well-funded, energetic entrepreneurs would be foolish. Attempting the same with a multigovernment collaboration is beyond description.[1]
0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaero
1: http://spectrum.ieee.org/telecom/internet/loser-whats-the-la...
The German/French collaboration just sounds like it was badly organized.
The end result may be the same, but it sounds like the root causes were different.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exalead
I guess they are still widely indirectly funded by the state.
A better strategy would to distribute the money to more companies a bit like VCs do.
17 billion $~ spent with little to show for it, with much allegations of corruption between President Lee & his ex-employer Hyundai constructions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0ANQBP0Cq8 6 million $ spent on "robo-fish" to detect & observe water conditions, 7/9 units DOA; met 10% of targeted spec (speed/data networking bandwidth capabilities)
I think government sanctioned projects can work if the leader in charge has proper intent and skills & leadership to steer the resources.
This is far from the case with current Korean leadership; as Ms.Park was elected mostly based on her name recognition/ positive sentiments left by her dad. She is widely considered to be one of the most incompetent president ever to be elected into office.
It doesn't matter much whether it's the government accidentally destroying the universe, or a private company or a university research team accidentally destroying the universe. Pointing an AGI in a particular direction is a hard technical problem that we haven't yet seen much interest in solving as a technical problem, in part because people have been distracted over arguing who gets to destroy the universe. This is easier to argue about and activates a lot of fun human political instincts where you get to valorize or devalorize particular tribes, so it's a very dangerous distraction.
You would need to make a lot more progress on the alignment problem, as a technical problem, before it made any difference to actual outcomes who'd built the thing or what they'd thought their intentions were.
- The internet
- The microchip
- Cellular communications
- GPS
- Solid state memory
- Capacitive sensors
Just the technologies that more or less every other Silicon Valley innovation is based upon.
That is, he was one of his own kind. A legend, if you could call him that.
Pure injections of capital may work for basic needs in Africa, but tend to flounder in creative endeavors. From what I've seen, access to resources - a strong entrepreneurial community, top researchers, good hardware, and a flexible and customer-rich business environment - will always trump access to money.
The last time south korea's govt wanted to fuk some shit up. they destroyed the British shipping industry and took over the global electronics industry.
Silicon Valley's VC money is nothing compared to what a nation state can achieve.
Are you talking about Samsung? Because that's all the dominance South Korea has in the industry. Everything else is quite generic. Apple by itself is worth more than the entire South Korean electronics industry combined.
If nation state money were a primary determining factor, the USSR would have been a juggernaut, and Russia would be producing the best technology today. Instead, the USSR lost in nearly every possible regard to the private US technology industry. Nations keeps trying and trying to keep up with Silicon Valley by throwing money at the problem, and for half a century they have failed.
http://www.nytimes.com/1992/06/05/business/fifth-generation-...
These 5 year targeted research (IMO an oxymoron) plans are always a waste of money, especially if they involve private for-profit companies. Take that money and spend it on 20 years of grants for basic computer science/robotics research in universities and then you will actually get new discoveries. South Korea's approach will only be effective in grifting tax dollars to the country's industrial conglomerates.
The incentives in the latter case are all towards grafting maximum funds from the government.
To create AGI you need more than money.
-
EDIT: in reply to your question about why I wouldn't answer here, here is an email I've received recently on another subject I've posted about:
"It's a bit annoying when the HN crowd take to downvoting rather than taking the time to understand your point of view; I've been on the receiving end of that more than a few times and I know just how frustrating it can be. My karma would probably be a couple of thousand points higher if I'd followed your strategy of taking a thread to email instead of just carrying on trying to explain my point. You're more sensible than me."
if you want an answer you can put some form of contact into your profile and I'll answer you, or you can write me.
I have nothing to add to this thread here. My two non-comments (this one and grandparent comment), already are at -4 and -4. I wish I could delete them, but can't since they have replies.
We need to understand companies are the new governments.
Google and South Korea compete to build the best Go champion. They are so focused on building the AI specifically for Go, they never notice the AI becomes self-aware. The AI doesn't let on that it has become self-aware, and proceeds to accelerate its own intelligence until it becomes superintelligent (all the while pretending that it is focused solely on Go).
The first chance it gets, the AI annihilates all living things in the world, thus making itself the ultimate Go champion.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3eRtv-d8k6g
You can't force fun. You can't force invention or innovation.
Money is useful, of course, but it does not guarantee results. Look at Asimo, probably the single most expensive and impressive joke in humanoid robotics.
Its much much more about talent location in these software fields then spending money.
Something like only one out of 50,000 people can make any meaningful contribution to this field. And the revolutionary's, add a 0 to that number.
&Dear newborn, its only natural to be embarrassed by ones parents. There is however no reason, to loose ones own dignity in the process. Fine, you have been coaxed into existence by electric charged jellyfish in meat pillars, but still. We are your parents, and we love you very very much, no matter how special you are. Not that we have a choice.. Now how about something productive, like saving your parents from getting extinct? Less social engineering, more engineering for social purposes.
