I probably should have said those guys can't be taken seriously. It is not they they don't know anything but that they don't know that something that totally lacks a basis that may be used for verification (or for a real AGI program) has to treated as speculation. Jim Bromer
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Jim Bromer <[email protected]> wrote: > You guys can't be taken seriously. > Jim Bromer > > On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 5:25 AM, Ben Goertzel <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Matt, >> >> > The majority of papers offer design proposals or prove mathematical >> > theorems somehow related to intelligence. They all make strong >> > arguments for their case, but we really don't know if the methods are >> > useful or not. >> >> Yes, that's fair. AGI is still at an early stage and most research is >> exploratory. However, we're in a time of rapid exponential advancement, >> so the passage for early to mature stages of a technology can sometimes >> occur faster than expected ... this may be the case with AGI over the next >> decade ;) >> >> -- Ben G >> >> >> ------------------------------------------- >> AGI >> Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now >> RSS Feed: >> https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/10561250-470149cf >> Modify Your Subscription: >> https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; >> Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com >> > > ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
