I agree with Richard and hereby formally request that Ben chime in.
It is my contention that SAT is a relatively narrow form of Narrow AI and not
general enough to be on an AGI list.
This is not meant, in any way shape or form, to denigrate the work that you are
doing. It is very important work.
It's just that you're performing the equivalent of presenting a biology paper
at a physics convention. :-)
----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Bromer
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2008 11:52 AM
Subject: **SPAM** Re: [agi] Logical Satisfiability...Get used to it.
On the contrary, Vladimir is completely correct in requesting that the
discussion go elsewhere: this has no relevance to the AGI list, and
there are other places where it would be pertinent.
Richard Loosemore
If Ben doesn't want me to continue, I will stop posting to this group.
Otherwise please try to understand what I said about the relevance of SAT to
AGI and try to address the specific issues that I mentioned. On the other
hand, if you don't want to waste your time in this kind of discussion then do
just that: Stay out of it.
Jim Bromer
Jim Bromer
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
agi | Archives | Modify Your Subscription
-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription:
http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=98558129-0bdb63
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
