MIKE TINTNER>>>> "Isn't it obvious that the brain is able to understand the wealth of language by relatively few computations - quite intricate, hierarchical, multi-levelled processing,"
ED PORTER>>>> How do you find the right set of "relatively few computations" and/or models that are appropriate in a complex context without massive computation? -----Original Message----- From: Mike Tintner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 12:12 PM To: agi@v2.listbox.com Subject: Re: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research] Matt:: The whole point of using massive parallel computation is to do the hard part of the problem. I get it : you and most other AI-ers are equating "hard" with "very, very complex," right? But you don't seriously think that the human mind successfully deals with language by "massive parallel computation", do you? Isn't it obvious that the brain is able to understand the wealth of language by relatively few computations - quite intricate, hierarchical, multi-levelled processing, yes, (in order to understand, for example, any of the sentences you or I are writing here), but only a tiny fraction of the operations that computers currently perform? The whole idea of massive parallel computation here, surely has to be wrong. And yet none of you seem able to face this to my mind obvious truth. I only saw this term recently - perhaps it's v. familiar to you (?) - that the human brain works by "look-up" rather than "search". Hard problems can have relatively simple but ingenious solutions. ----- 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/?&; ----- 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=71590357-a986d6
