We've spent years talking about Artificial General Intelligence (AGI). But perhaps there is another concept worth exploring: Observable General Intelligence (OGI). Instead of asking whether a human or an AI is generally intelligent, we ask a simpler question: How objectively intelligent is its observable behaviour?
Observable General Intelligence 2
Maybe we've been asking the wrong question. For years, the discussion has been about Artificial General Intelligence. Can we build it? When will it arrive? How will we know? But perhaps the future of intelligence is not really about whether it is artificial. Perhaps the future of general intelligence is being observable.
It’s the behavior, stupid!
I think we often confuse criticism with course correction. Criticism usually comes after frustration has built up. "I'm sick of you always doing that." By then, several incidents may have accumulated, emotions are higher, and the discussion can easily become about the person rather than the behavior. SpatzAI takes a different approach....
A Speculative Research Proposal on Fair Conversation as a Pathway Toward Artificial General Intelligence
This paper presents a speculative research hypothesis rather than a claim. It proposes that fair conversation may provide a richer environment for developing general intelligence than the bounded environments traditionally used in many AI systems, such as games....
Communal Accountability
Most workplace systems still treat objectionable behaviour as something for leadership or HR to decide. That makes sense once a matter has become serious. But what about the moment before that? What about the small public put-down, the dismissive tone, the repeated interruption, the sarcastic remark, the patronising comment, or the unfair delivery during disagreement?
If You Were Sue, Would You Use SpatzChat?
Imagine you are Sue in a team meeting. You suggest an idea. Jim responds publicly: “Babe, that’ll NEVER work! What were you thinking?” Maybe Jim was careless. Maybe he did not realise how dismissive he sounded. Maybe he did. Either way, the real test is what happens next. Sue gives him a light verbal caution:
I’ll Spatz You Later
Imagine if we had a chat-app and platform that enabled teams, during meetings, to address minor objectionable issues on the fly, before they were allowed to fester, compound and escalate into more intractable conflict incidents down the track.
A Single Operating System for Team Fairness
Teams now carry more social, political, and cultural tension than ever before. DEI, woke, civil rights, identity, fairness, gender, race, religion, politics, and then, before we even get started, the normal work issues arrive as well: deadlines, pressure, mistakes, ego, authority, status, and disagreement. No wonder teams get caught up in minor workplace spats....
I have been thinking about a possibility that sits at the heart of workplace conflict research. What if disagreement and conflict are not the same thing? Reference: Understand Conflict Most conflict researchers seem to define conflict broadly enough to include disagreements....
Addressing Workplace Impingements
For years I've been interested in workplace conflict or micro-conflicts, but lately I've been thinking about something even smaller. Not conflict. Not even an infringement. An impingement or someone impinging on the other player's space. In soccer, a player can subtly tug an opponent's shirt. It may be almost invisible. The referee might miss it. The crowd certainly won't notice most of the time....
Object123 