Perhaps formulating the problem space is part of the solution: http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/cogarch0/common/theory/prob.html ~PM From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [agi] Multiple Vantages Can Be Used to Find Multiple Observation Objectives Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2013 10:25:16 +0000
You’ve given two examples of real world problems – “what do those women really think about me?” / “how to reason about methods of dealing with ‘inscrutable’ problems”? Show how in either (or any real world problem whatsoever) there is or can be “ a systematic search through possibilities” What are the systematic possibilities whenever you have to “read minds” (as above) – a classification which embraces a vast amount of psychological RWR. What are the systematic possibilities for considering/reading – *what Obama really intends to do in any foreign policy area”, or Iran intends to do re Israel, or ......etc The whole damn point of RWR is that you don’t have a set of options – you have to construct options from scratch – and you aren’t going to get anywhere near a set. What you’re arguing is pretty well the complete opposite of the truth. From: Jim Bromer Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 10:05 AM To: AGI Subject: Re: [agi] Multiple Vantages Can Be Used to Find Multiple Observation Objectives Mike, lt is a systematic search through possibilities. The possibilities are limited to reasoned conjectures about the problem. The preparation does involve using ideas that had been considered before but the majority of the ideas do not come from a pre-prepared set of "options". The conjectures do include what I call imaginative projection, but the use of the imagination in reasoned conjectures is driven by rational consideration. Jim Bromer On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 4:51 AM, Mike Tintner <[email protected]> wrote: Jim, My post explicitly said that a/your guess is a “reasoned inference.” The key point I’m making – and you’re ignoring – is that it’s a one-off, one-at-a-time business rather than a narrow AI systematic search through a pre-prepared set of options (the kind that cause such “complexity”). And this BTW is the irrefutable truth – no one’s going to produce an AGI problem where there is a neat set of options. When you noted the existence of “inscrutable events” – (I would say “partly invisible events/objects”) – you were onto something big, taking a big step forward in your AGI thinking. When you started looking for “reliable” ways of solving problems about them – (trying basically to cling to the old narrow AI ways) – you took a big step back. Concentrate on the invisible nature of the subjects of real world problems. There is no reliable way to deal with them. You just gotta get stuck in and guess, or if you prefer “hypothesize”/”theorise”. AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription ------------------------------------------- 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
