Vladimir Nesov wrote:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 2:07 AM, Richard Loosemore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I do not laugh at your misunderstanding, I laugh at the general
complacency; the attitude that a problem denied is a problem solved. I
laugh at the tragicomedic waste of effort.
How confident are you that this only-complex-AI limitation applies in
reality? How much would you bet on it? I'm not convinced, and I think
that if you are convinced too much, you made wrong conclusions from
your data, unless you communicated too little of what formed your
intuition.
I am completely sure that it applies (although your phrasing makes me
wonder if you have interpreted my exact worry accurately... I will have
to come back to that).
I am confident becasue of this. I have been trying to understand the
relationship between theoretical models of thought (both natural and
artificial) since at least 1980, and one thing I have noticed is that
people devise theoretical structures that are based on the assumption
that intelligence is not complex .... but then they use these structures
in such a way that the resulting system is almost always complex.
Richard Loosemore
-------------------------------------------
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=101455710-f059c4
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
