[p2p-research] Building Alliances (basic income and entrepreneurship)

[J. Andrew Rogers]

On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 10:17 PM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Here is a page on the scientific controversies around MI theory, with none
> of the challengers making such an absurd statement as you just did above. I
> think it is fairly typical of your 'know it all' approach, for those with an
> open mind, see http://www.indiana.edu/~intell/mitheory.shtml


On the contrary, it is discredited because multiple intelligences have
a trivial reduction to a single intelligence. Since this is
mathematically required, it is not surprising. It was generally been
considered dubious when it was first proposed, but it formally died
almost a decade ago.

See: http://www.vetta.org/documents/Machine_Super_Intelligence.pdf

This is generally a great paper on the history of the mathematical
derivation and definition of intelligence up to and including the
current state of the mathematics.



>> Because P2P systems are theoretically defined in such terms? Or do you
>> think mathematics does not apply? I'm not big on magical thinking.
>
> it would probably be helpful to have experience with other modalities of
> knowing


What are "other modalities of knowing"?


-- 
J. Andrew Rogers
realityminer.blogspot.com