From: Ben Goertzel (ben@goertzel.org)
Date: Mon Apr 30 2001 - 09:19:58 MDT
> > * Reusability
> > An AI is something too complex to be rewritten every few years.
> It is not just
>
> An AI is something too complex to be written, period. At least explicitly,
> by mere humans. I'm really surprised some people are not yet tired of this
> exercise in futility, slowly but surely reaching epic proportions.
I am not sure what this statement is supposed to mean, actually.
Of course, an AI system has to be a self-organizing learning system, in
which not all details of the system's RAM-state are specified by the
programmers
But I suspect you mean something stronger than that
>
> > the procedures, it's also the knowledge the system has
> accumulated. This means
> > that all the components will have to be reusable to an
> unprecedented extent. An
> > idea is reusable, but its implementation is not.
>
> You're describing good system design. All very useful, but not for AI.
> Because explicitly coded AI is too hard for monkeys. Says at least this
> monkey.
It seems to me that, because YOU don't understand how to program real AI,
you're asserting that no one does.
I don't see any rational argument presented in your message, just a strong
opinion that building AI is too hard for humans.
> > that would allow many people to contribute, without breaking the system.
> > Deductive thought is just one subsystem, other subsystems are
> spatial thought,
> > classification, clustering, self-analysis, etc.
>
> I hope you like it in there, where you're sitting. I've been there myself,
> briefly, but thankfully, have gotten better since.
All right, your tone has gotten sufficiently irritating that I won't waste
any more time replying to the numerous further glib and incorrect points in
your message.
Back to work...
ben
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:07:22 MST