On 11/2/06, Eric Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So Pei's comments are in some sense wishes. To be charitable-- maybe I should say beliefs supported by his experience. But they are not established facts. It remains a possibility, supported by reasonable evidence, that language learning may be an intractable additional step on top of building a program achieving other aspects of intelligence.
Of course you are right. We have no fact about AGI until someone build it, and convince the others that it is indeed an AGI, which may take longer than the former step. ;-) As I mentioned before, I haven't done any actual experiment in language learning yet, so my beliefs on this topic have relatively low confidence compared to some of my other beliefs. I'm just not convinced by the arguments about their impossibility. For example, I don't think we know a system that is intelligent in every sense, but cannot understand a human language, even after a reasonably long training period. Pei ----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
