On Nov 4, 2007 12:40 PM, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- Jiri Jelinek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If you can't get meaning from clean input format then what makes you > > think you can handle NL? > > Humans seem to get meaning more easily from ambiguous statements than from > mathematical formula.
Different platform - different solutions. >Otherwise you are programming, not teaching. Switching to less ambiguous format doesn't prevent teaching. > > When working on an AGI proof of concept, NL just adds unnecessary > > complexity. > > Do you think you could pass a Turing test without natural language? No, but it's a positive test only. Failing it tells nothing. > This is a minimal test for AI, without the added complexity of vision, > robotics, speech, etc. False >How do you propose to measure intelligence in a proof of concept? Hmmm, let me check my schedule... Ok, I'll figure this out on Thursday night (unless I get hit by a lottery bus). "Jelinek test" is coming ;-)) ... I'll get back to you then.. Regards, Jiri Jelinek ----- 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/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=61463681-5f2863
