On 3/9/07, Jef Allbright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We seem to have skipped over my point about intelligence being about the encoding of regularities of effective interaction of an agent with its environment, but perhaps that is now moot.
Now I see you use "information" to mean "regularities of effective interaction of an agent with its environment", which I call "belief" in my system. Previously I assume by "information", you, like most people in the field, mean an objective description of the environment, which I think is a misconception. I've been avoiding the term "encoding" because of its association with the notion of "perfectly keeping the information". Especially, when you contrast it with "processing" information, you seem to suggest that an AI system should try to be a "faithful observer or recorder or compressor", which I think is neither necessary nor possible. Furthermore, "to summarize experience into beliefs" (my way to say what I agree in your message) is only part of the function of intelligence, but not the whole story. To overstress this aspect will lead to incomplete models of intelligence. For example, factors like goal, action, context, prediction, etc. are missing in this picture, and the system looks like a passive observer of the environment. Again, I probably misread your message, but the above is where my initial negative response to your statement "Intelligence is about the encoding, not the processing, of information" came from. 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/?list_id=303
