--- Richard Loosemore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Steve Richfield wrote: >> What I fail to see is how fully "understanding" the written/spoken >> word is of any use to any computer program! What would you then do with >> that understanding, since most of it will be beyond the ability of any >> computer program to do anything useful and accurate with? > > If you mean this literally [!] then I am at a loss for words. Perhaps > you mean something else by it.
This is a perfect example of the point Steve was trying to make. Humans can understand each other in spite of bad grammar such as missing words. You use your own knowledge to fill in the missing pieces. Analyzing complex grammatical structure is mostly a waste of time. The best semantic model we have now is a bag of words and short phrases. Word order is mostly not important. In my case, I understand Steve to mean a non-AGI program, which makes up 100% of the programs that exist today. And Richard, I know you will never be literally at a loss for words, but I know what you mean too. -- Matt Mahoney, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------- 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=103754539-40ed26 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
