agi  

Messages by Thread

• • Re: [agi] Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard? J. Andrew Rogers
  • Re: [agi] Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard? Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard? Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard? J. Andrew Rogers
  • Re: [agi] Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard? Jim Bromer
  • [agi] Invalidating AGI designs (was Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard?) J. Andrew Rogers
  • Re: [agi] Invalidating AGI designs (was Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard?) Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] Invalidating AGI designs (was Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard?) J. Andrew Rogers
  • RE: [agi] Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard? Piaget Modeler
  • Re: [agi] Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard? Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard? J. Andrew Rogers
  • Re: [agi] Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard? Jim Bromer
  • RE: [agi] Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard? Piaget Modeler
  • Re: [agi] Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard? J. Andrew Rogers
  • RE: [agi] Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard? Piaget Modeler
  • Re: [agi] Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard? J. Andrew Rogers
  • RE: [agi] Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard? Piaget Modeler
  • Re: [agi] Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard? Mike Archbold
  • Re: [agi] Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard? J. Andrew Rogers
  • Re: [agi] Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard? Dean Pomerleau
  • Re: [agi] Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard? Tim Tyler
  • Re: [agi] Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard? J. Andrew Rogers
  • Re: [agi] Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard? Dorian Aur
  • Re: [agi] Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard? Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard? Matt Mahoney
  • Re: [agi] Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard? Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard? Alan Grimes
  • Re: [agi] Re: Could Brain Emulation be NP-Hard? TimTyler
• [agi] Deep Learning Machine Beats Humans in IQ Test fpleyer76
  • Re: [agi] Deep Learning Machine Beats Humans in IQ Test Matt Mahoney
  • Re: [agi] Deep Learning Machine Beats Humans in IQ Test Logan Streondj
  • Re: [agi] Deep Learning Machine Beats Humans in IQ Test Matt Mahoney
  • Re: [agi] Deep Learning Machine Beats Humans in IQ Test Jim Bromer
• [agi] The API fallacy and the world's programmability Anastasios Tsiolakidis
  • Re: [agi] The API fallacy and the world's programmability J. Andrew Rogers
• [agi] distributive representation and linear dependence Yan King Yin, 甄景贤
  • RE: [agi] distributive representation and linear dependence Piaget Modeler
  • Re: [agi] distributive representation and linear dependence Yan King Yin, 甄景贤
  • Re: [agi] distributive representation and linear dependence Yan King Yin, 甄景贤
  • Re: [agi] distributive representation and linear dependence Anastasios Tsiolakidis
  • Re: [agi] distributive representation and linear dependence Matt Mahoney
  • Re: [agi] distributive representation and linear dependence Yan King Yin, 甄景贤
  • Re: [agi] distributive representation and linear dependence Matt Mahoney
  • Re: [agi] distributive representation and linear dependence Yan King Yin, 甄景贤
  • Re: [agi] distributive representation and linear dependence Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] distributive representation and linear dependence Yan King Yin, 甄景贤
  • Re: [agi] distributive representation and linear dependence Matt Mahoney
  • RE: [agi] distributive representation and linear dependence Piaget Modeler
• [agi] [offtopic] general H+ list? Alan Grimes
  • Re: [agi] [offtopic] general H+ list? Mark Seveland
  • RE: [agi] [offtopic] general H+ list? Piaget Modeler
• [agi] Combinatorics Is Important to Use With Discrete-Based AI Jim Bromer
  • [agi] ??????[agi] Combinatorics Is Important to Use With Discrete-Based AI Matt Lind
  • Re: [agi] Combinatorics Is Important to Use With Discrete-Based AI Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] Combinatorics Is Important to Use With Discrete-Based AI Jim Bromer
  • [agi] Human-Level AI & Phenomenology ARAKAWA Naoya
  • Re: [agi] Human-Level AI & Phenomenology Mike Archbold
  • Re: [agi] Combinatorics Is Important to Use With Discrete-Based AI Jim Bromer
• [agi] At last, an intuitive, explanatory, scientific theory of consciousness EdFromNH .
  • Re: [agi] At last, an intuitive, explanatory, scientific theory of consciousness Logan Streondj
  • [agi] Re: At last, an intuitive, explanatory, scientific theory of consciousness EdFromNH .
  • Re: [agi] At last, an intuitive, explanatory, scientific theory of consciousness Kyle Kidd
  • Re: [agi] At last, an intuitive, explanatory, scientific theory of consciousness Mark Seveland
  • [agi] Re: At last, an intuitive, explanatory, scientific theory of consciousness EdFromNH .
  • Re: [agi] Re: At last, an intuitive, explanatory, scientific theory of consciousness Mark Seveland
  • Re: [agi] At last, an intuitive, explanatory, scientific theory of consciousness Matt Mahoney
  • [agi] Re: At last, an intuitive, explanatory, scientific theory of consciousness EdFromNH .
  • Re: [agi] Re: At last, an intuitive, explanatory, scientific theory of consciousness Matt Mahoney
  • [agi] Re: At last, an intuitive, explanatory, scientific theory of consciousness EdFromNH .
  • Re: [agi] Re: At last, an intuitive, explanatory, scientific theory of consciousness Matt Mahoney
  • RE: [agi] Re: At last, an intuitive, explanatory, scientific theory of consciousness Nanograte Knowledge Technologies
  • Re: [agi] At last, an intuitive, explanatory, scientific theory of consciousness Roland Pihlakas
  • Re: [agi] At last, an intuitive, explanatory, scientific theory of consciousness Matt Mahoney
• [agi] TrollBot Piaget Modeler
  • Re: [agi] TrollBot Juan Carlos Kuri Pinto
• [agi] MetaPartitioning the Discussion Group Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] MetaPartitioning the Discussion Group Steve Richfield
  • Re: [agi] MetaPartitioning the Discussion Group Mike Archbold
  • RE: [agi] MetaPartitioning the Discussion Group Piaget Modeler
  • RE: [agi] MetaPartitioning the Discussion Group Piaget Modeler
  • Re: [agi] MetaPartitioning the Discussion Group Mike Archbold
  • Re: [agi] MetaPartitioning the Discussion Group Dorian Aur
• [agi] Peevish colin hales
• [agi] applicable : apply :: relevant : ? Piaget Modeler
  • Re: [agi] applicable : apply :: relevant : ? Aaron Hosford
  • RE: [agi] applicable : apply :: relevant : ? Piaget Modeler
  • Re: [agi] applicable : apply :: relevant : ? Anastasios Tsiolakidis
  • RE: [agi] applicable : apply :: relevant : ? Piaget Modeler
  • Re: [agi] applicable : apply :: relevant : ? Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] applicable : apply :: relevant : ? Jim Bromer
  • RE: [agi] applicable : apply :: relevant : ? Piaget Modeler
  • Re: [agi] applicable : apply :: relevant : ? Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] applicable : apply :: relevant : ? TJ Katal
• [agi] VLS Planning Piaget Modeler
• [agi] Genifer 4.0 theoretical notes Yan King Yin, 甄景贤
  • [agi] Re: Genifer 4.0 theoretical notes Yan King Yin, 甄景贤
  • Re: [agi] Genifer 4.0 theoretical notes Logan Streondj
• [agi] Overriding Deliberation Piaget Modeler
• [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Logan Streondj
  • RE: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Piaget Modeler
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Logan Streondj
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Logan Streondj
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Logan Streondj
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Mark Seveland
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Logan Streondj
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Matt Mahoney
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Matt Mahoney
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Matt Mahoney
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Matt Mahoney
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation J. Andrew Rogers
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation J. Andrew Rogers
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation J. Andrew Rogers
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Matt Mahoney
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Matt Mahoney
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Mark Seveland
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation J. Andrew Rogers
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation J. Andrew Rogers
  • Re: [agi] SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Logan Streondj
  • [agi] Re: SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Jim Bromer
  • [agi] Re: SAT in P Will Bring AI Nearer to the Ideal of Tractable Experimentation Jim Bromer
• [agi] Awareness Is Subject-Centric Jim Bromer
  • Re: [agi] Awareness Is Subject-Centric Mark Seveland
• [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Dorian Aur
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Mike Archbold
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Colin Hales
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Mark Seveland
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Benjamin Kapp
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Benjamin Kapp
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Colin Hales
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Alan Grimes
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Mark Seveland
  • [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Colin Hales
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Logan Streondj
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Colin Hales
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Mark Seveland
  • RE: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Piaget Modeler
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Mark Seveland
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Mark Seveland
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Colin Hales
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Dorian Aur
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Colin Hales
  • RE: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI colin hales
  • RE: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI colin hales
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Mark Seveland
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Mark Seveland
  • RE: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Piaget Modeler
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Mark Seveland
  • RE: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Piaget Modeler
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Mark Seveland
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Mark Seveland
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Benjamin Kapp
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Dorian Aur
  • RE: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI colin hales
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Mark Seveland
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Dorian Aur
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Mark Seveland
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Dorian Aur
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Logan Streondj
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Benjamin Kapp
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Dorian Aur
  • RE: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Piaget Modeler
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Benjamin Kapp
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI ARAKAWA Naoya
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Ben Goertzel
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Colin Hales
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Mark Seveland
  • RE: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Piaget Modeler
  • Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Colin Hales
• [agi] n-ary : n>1 loses the potential for one-to-one correspondence for relative evaluations Jim Bromer
  • [agi] Re: n-ary : n>1 loses the potential for one-to-one correspondence for relative evaluations Jim Bromer
• [agi] Genifer 3.0 white paper Yan King Yin, 甄景贤
  • Re: [agi] Genifer 3.0 white paper Keyvan Mir Mohammad Sadeghi
  • Re: [agi] Genifer 3.0 white paper Yan King Yin, 甄景贤
  • Re: [agi] Genifer 3.0 white paper Matt Mahoney
  • Re: [agi] Genifer 3.0 white paper Yan King Yin, 甄景贤
  • RE: [agi] Genifer 3.0 white paper Piaget Modeler
  • RE: [agi] Genifer 3.0 white paper Piaget Modeler
  • Re: [agi] Genifer 3.0 white paper Yan King Yin, 甄景贤

• Earlier messages
• Later messages