Mike Tintner wrote:
Richard,
Again, reread me precisely.
Saying your system is a "complex system" doesn't constitute a creative
idea. What's the big deal here? Why is your system truly new and
different? Why will it solve any of the unsolved problems of AGI?
Where's the beef? And what on earth does the thing do? Site visitors &
investors will want to know these things.
What, in ad terms, is your U.S.P. ? Complexity is not a U.S.P.
Neither you nor your site answer these questions. And I've asked you
them on more than one occasion.
I made no reference to my site, I said "I already did publish a *paper*".
That would be my published paper called "Complex Systems, Artificial
Intelligece and Theoretical Psychology". There is also another that
gives more detail about some specifics:
[1] Loosemore, R.P.W. (2007). Complex Systems, Artificial Intelligence
and Theoretical Psychology. In B. Goertzel & P. Wang, Proceedings of the
2006 AGI Workshop. Amsterdam: IOS Press. This can be found online at
http://www.agiri.org/wiki/Workshop_Proceedings (chapter 11).
[2] Loosemore, R.P.W. & Harley, T.A. "Brains and Minds: On the
Usefulness of Localisation Data to Cognitive Psychology". To appear in
M.Bunzl & S.J.Hanson (Eds.), Philosophical Foundations of fMRI.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
These two papers answer all of the above, in spades.
So I ask you again: did you read this published work?
I will put these papers up on my site soon.
You go into detail on this forum criticising others & giving advice -
often v. well. You go into detail discussing friendliness - sorry, a
waste of time for me. But you never go into detail about your ideas or
your system - which is wasting a considerable opportunity.
Again, not true: see the papers.
Sure, I'm ignorant. But I know enough to spot ideas.
I only want you to base your criticisms on actual hard copy, not on
handwaving and vague accusations like
P.S. An advertising/marketing no-no - never use s.o. else' s title for
your site. It doesn't bespeak originality.
Mel Gilden formally gave me permission to use the name of his book as
the name of my company.
Sure, not original, but frankly I don't care. I liked the cover of the
book. ;-)
Richard Loosemore
Mike Tintner wrote:
Richard: I already did publish a paper doing exactly that ...
haven't you read it?
Yep. And I'm still mystified. I should have added that I have a vague
idea of what you mean by complex system and its newness, but no idea
of why it will solve any unsolved problem of AGI, and absolutely no
idea of what it actually does. My guess is: you use it to bet on the
gee-gees :) Does anyone else know BTW? (This is marketing research).
So I went to the trouble of writing an 8424-word paper and you have
absolutely no idea what it means, and cannot even get so far as to ask
some specific questions about it? It sounds a little like you are
saying: "I didn't understand this so you must try again."
How do I know that the text I already wrote was not perfect the way it
was, and that the problem is at your end....? ;-) Just asking.
I was actually going to re-write it in a longer form soon, because the
size of the chapter that Ben would accept for the conference
proceedings was barely enough for me to explain the idea properly.
-------------------------------------------
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/?&;
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
-------------------------------------------
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
