Mark, You claimed I made a particular false statement about the Collins paper. (That by itself could have just been a misunderstanding or an honest mistake.) But then you added an insult to that by implying I had probably made the alleged error because I was incapable of understand the mathematics involved. As if that wasn't enough in the way of gratuitous insults, you suggested my alleged error called in to question the validity of the other things I have said on this list.
That is a pretty deep, purposely and unnecessarily, insulting put down. I think I have shown that I did understood the math in question, perhaps better than you, since you initially totally ignored the part of the paper that supported my statement. I have shown that my statement was in fact correct by a reasonable interpretation of my words. Thus, not only was your accusation of my error unjustified, but also, even more so, the two insults placed on top of it. You have not apologized for your unjustified accusation of error and the two additional unnecessary insults (unless your statement "Ok. I'll bite." is considered an appropriate apology for such an improper set of deep insults). Instead you have continued in an even more insulting tone, including starting one subsequent email with a comment about something I had said that went as follows: "<HeavySarcasm>Wow. Is that what dot products are?</HeavySarcasm>" I don't mind people questioning me, or pointing out errors when I make them. I even have a fair amount of tolerance for people mistakenly accusing me of making an error, if they make the false accusation honestly and not in a purposely insulting manner, as did you. Why should I waste more time conversing with someone who wants to converse in such an insulting tone? Mark, you have been quick to publicly call other people on this list "trolls", in effect to their face, in front of the whole list. This is a behavior most people would consider very hurtful. So what do you call people on this list who not only falsely accuse other people of errors, add several unnecessary insults based on the false accusation, and then when shown to be in error, continue addressing comments to the falsely accused person in a "HeavySarcasm" style? How about "mean spirited." Mark, you are an intelligent person, and I have found some of your posts valuable. That day a few weeks ago when you and Ben were riffing back and forth, I was offended by your tone, but I thought many of your questions were valuable. If you wish to continue any sort of communication with me, feel free to question and challenge, but please lay off the "HeavySarcasm" and insults which do nothing to further the exchange and clarification of ideas. With regard to your questions below, If you actually took the time to read my prior responses, I think you will see I have substantially answered them. Ed Porter -----Original Message----- From: Mark Waser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 1:24 PM To: agi@v2.listbox.com Subject: Re: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research] Ed, Get a grip. Try to write with complete words in complete sentences (unless discreted means a combination of excreted and discredited -- which works for me :-). I'm not coming back for a second swing. I'm still pursuing the first one. You just aren't oriented well enough to realize it. >> Now you are implicitly attacking me for implying it is new to think you >> could deal with vectors in some sort of compressed representation. Nope. First of all, compressed representation is *absolutely* the wrong term for what you're looking for. Second, I actually am still trying to figure out what *you* think you ARE gushing about. (And my quest is not helped by such gems as "all though [sic] it may not be new to you, it seems to be new to some") Why don't you just answer my question? Do you believe that this is some sort of huge conceptual breakthrough? For NLP (as you were initially pushing) or just for some nice computational tricks? I'll also note that you've severely changed the focus of this away from the NLP that you were initially raving about as such quality work -- and while I'll agree that kernel mapping is a very elegant tool -- Collin's work is emphatically *not* what I would call a shining example of it (I mean, *look* at his results -- they're terrible). Yet you were touting it because of your 500,000 dimension fantasies and you're belief that it's good NLP work. So, in small words -- and not whining about an attack -- what precisely are you saying? ----- 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=73284487-89c736
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>