From: "Jeffrey E." <[email protected]> To: Ben Goertzel < >, Joscha Bach < Subject: Re: Date: Mon, 07 Sep 2015 02:04:10 +0000 im aware of the goals . i have yet to see deliverables. . babys learn any one of a multitude of languages. this is less about intelligence and more about brain architecutre . how do brains take signals , minimize noiise and make cohenrent mental objects. images. language. tounch smell. temporal ccomponents. maybe music analogy. . structure of language. , illusions in each sense. ambiguity in each. ? ( maybe an insight). im going to clean my house. ( interior > exterior?. im going to paint my house. exterior. . visual lady and vase. ambiguity might lead to underlying process.. it is easy to choose which note does not beling to a new musical piece. . heard for the first time.? odd. on another note what happend to gino, he went dada? On Sun, Sep 6, 2015 at 9:15 PM, Ben Goertzel > wrote: I think that "learning language like a baby" is a fantastic and important research area ... I'm just not (at this moment) seeing how to boil it down into a crisply-defined *challenge* that neatly gauges incremental progress .... "Doing X" is straightforward to measure from a challenge-problem context, whereas "Learning X" is harder to measure in a challenge-problem context, because eager competitive contestants can always program most of X into their system and then make their system kinda-learn the rest.... Diamandis's X-Prize Foundation has asked me for help with formulating an AGI X Prize multiple times over the years, and I never had anything great to suggest for precisely this reason. Of course a prize for "achieving human level AGI" would make sense-- but that's such a big achievement that if you get there, the prize will be the least of your worries anyway! It's measuring incremental progress in a rigorous and cheating-proof way that's so tricky... About how babies learn language. Clearly it's a lot about embodiment a