On 07/01/2008, Robert Wensman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think what you really want to use is the > concept of adaptability, or maybe you could say you want an AGI system that > is programmed in an indirect way (meaning that the program instructions are > very far away from what the system actually does). But please do not say > things like "we should write AGI systems that are not programmed". It hurts > my ears/eyes. > > /Robert Wensman >
I'd agree that Mike could do with tightening up his language. I wonder if he would agree with the following? The programs that determine the way system acts and changes is not highly related to the programming provided by the AI designer. Computer systems like this have been designed. All desktop computers can act, solve problems and change their programming (apt etc) in ways un-envisaged by the people who designed the hardware and BIOS. This approach still allows the programs the AI designer provided to have influence in *which* programs exist in the system, if not how they exactly they work. This is what would make it different from current computer systems. Will Pearson ----- 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=82558458-0ed659
