Why does AGI not attract the interest of investors?
Let's look at one ball-park view of the math.
Let's assume we get a group of highly talented programmers and artificial general intelligence researchers together to focus on the problem full time. Let's assume a substantial group of researchers and programmers for 15 years on an annual budget of $4M or $60M total.
After 15 years, leveraging the software and hardware advances that are already happening, our team, in my view, realistically has a 25% chance of reaching recursive1 AGI. (Many would argue we have a 25% chance without the team!) Of course such an effort could be scaled down or up.
It would be trivial to turn AGI into $10B in short order by making a few revolutionary inventions (say cold or hot fusion energy, quantum computing, etc), solving a few key diseases, or maybe playing the market for a while. Not to mention solving numerous world problems and gaining unlimited life extension (see Ray Kurzweil's "The Singularity Is Near").
So the expected gain is .25 x 10B = 2.5B on an investment of $60M - a ROI of 4,100% over 15 years (28% / yr). Not bad. In fact the upside is nearly infinite so the ROI is really much better.
Plus a few small fringe benefits like not dying.
And fame exceeding anyone in history.
With computing power already far exceeding what was available in the AI winter, countless powerful algorithms readily available as potential components of an AGI system and an increasing number of suggestions for AGI approaches, now is the time to make it happen.
So where is the billionaire with some pocket change?
Posted 8/5/07, Minor mods 9/22/07
1 Above human level and exponentially self-improving.
| Comments |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||


