William, On 7/7/08, William Pearson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 2008/7/3 Steve Richfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > William and Vladimir, > > > > IMHO this discussion is based entirely on the absence of any sort of > > interface spec. Such a spec is absolutely necessary for a large AGI > project > > to ever succeed, and such a spec could (hopefully) be wrung out to at > least > > avoid the worst of the potential traps. > > And if you want the interface to be upgradeable, or alterable what > then? This conversation was based on the ability to change as much of > the functional and learning parts of the systems as possible.
You should read the X.25 (original US version) or EDIFACT(newer/better European version) EDI (Electronic Data Interchange) spec. There are several free downloadable EDIFACT descriptions on-line, but the X.25 people want to charge for EVERYTHING. This is the basis for most of the world's financial systems. It is designed for smooth upgrading, even though some users on a network do NOT have the latest spec or software. The specifics of various presently defined message types aren't interesting in this context. However, the way that they make highly complex networks gradually upgradable IS interesting and I believe provides a usable roadmap for AGI development. When looking at this, think of this as a prospective standard for RPC (Remote Procedure Calls). Steve Richfield ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=106510220-47b225 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
