On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 4:39 PM, Brad Paulsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, it has, in fact, been tried before. It has, in fact, always failed. > Your comments about the quality of Ben's approach are noted. Maybe you're > right. But, it's not germane to my argument which is that those parts of > Ben G.'s approach that call for human-level NLU, and that propose embodiment > (or virtual embodiment) as a way to achieve human-level NLU, have been tried > before, many times, and have always failed. If Ben G. knows something he's > not telling us then, when he does, I'll consider modifying my views. But, > remember, my comments were never directed at the OpenCog project or Ben G. > personally. They were directed at an AGI *strategy* not invented by Ben G. > or OpenCog. The OCP approach/strategy, both in crucial specifics of its parts and particularly in its total synthesis, *IS* novel; I recommend a closer re-examination! The mere resemblance of some of its parts to past [failed] AI undertakings is not enough reason to dismiss those parts, IMHO, dislike of embodiment or NLU or any other aspect that has a GOFAI past lurking in the wings not withstanding. OTOH, I will happily agree to disagree on these points to save the AGI list from going down in flames! ;-) -dave ------------------------------------------- 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=114414975-3c8e69 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
