Steve:
There is a difference between an engineering project, where the
fundamentals are all well known and there is a broad consensus between
experts and a true research project where there is not much agreement
even amongst experts. There is a innovation in bridge building, for
example, but that innovation is forged from well tested and carefully
studied scientific or technological applications from other fields.

One mistake that I have made is that I believed that by discussing
this for years in a group like this I will be better prepared to get
my project going. The problem is, that I keep getting sidetracked in a
lot of side issues that I just don't agree with. However, as I have
said, I did realize after discussing this with you that I really need
to further develop different theories about how my (different) ideas
might be transferred from one IO modality to another (if some of them
worked). So I appreciate that aspect of this thread. As I said, this
idea is great for a rough sketch of a plan but it won't make the
needed innovations and discoveries for you.
Jim Bromer


On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 2:31 AM, Steve Richfield
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Jim,
>
> On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Jim Bromer via AGI <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>> However, when he starts talking about project he wants us to join in
>> even though he has not actually started by providing us with any of
>> his own definitions - and he wants these definitions in canonical form
>> - I have to draw the line. That's not how it is done. It doesn't work
>> that way. You write interface definitions when you have so many
>> interfaces that no one can recognize them by name.
>
>
> These are the words of someone who lacks experience designing large-scale
> systems. It only takes around twice the work of writing a single interface
> to write a general interface. Often in the final analysis the payoff comes
> in the first interface, because this exercise forces you to consider
> EVERYTHING at the beginning, rather than having to revisit the interface for
> everything you forgot to put into it when you first created it in haste.
>
> Of course, if you are going to exchange code with someone else, the payoff
> is immediate.
>
> It is my guess that early attention to details that are easily put off, like
> adjusting operation (learning), will force drilling down into the REAL (but
> hidden) nuts and bolts of AGI - the very things for which you have been
> searching.
>
> Ignoring canonical forms and standard interfaces may be sentencing you to a
> lifetime of fruitless search.
>
> Steve


-------------------------------------------
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

Reply via email to