>but I don't want to discuss the details about the >algorithms until I have gotten a chance to see if they work or not,
Hearing this makes my teeth gnash. GO AND IMPLEMENT THEM. THEN TELL US On 10/15/08, Colin Hales <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > David Hart wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 5:52 PM, Colin Hales >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >> wrote: >> >> >> So you'll just have to wait. Sorry. I also have patent/IP issues. >> >> >> Exactly what qualia am I expected to feel when you say the words >> 'Intellectual Property'? (that's a rhetorical question, just in case >> there was any doubt!) >> >> I'd like to suggest that the COMP=false thread be considered a >> completely mis-placed, undebatable and dead topic on the AGI list. >> Maybe people who like Chinese Rooms will sign up for the new >> COMP=false list... >> >> -dave > Hi, > The attendees here would like to be involved in the parenthood of real > AGI, yes? > > I am being rather forthright in scientifically suggesting an approach to > that outcome focussed entirely on COMP may not achieve that goal, and > that a diversity of views is needed...and I have a non-COMP approach > which is possibly a way to AGI. > > I know may claims have not been scientifically backed up. I will fix that. > > The fact is - COMP has already been refuted twice in print. I will be > adding 2 more refutations. That is already 2 counts that make term > COMP-AGI an oxymoron. COMP was always a conjecture and has never been > proven. The only recent assessment in the literature ends with the words > "Computationalism is dead". Basic common sense dictates that if you are > really keen on real AGI that is scientifically viable, then a diversity > of approaches is advisable. According to Ben that seems to be the way of > the group as a whole. I take some comfort from this. The necessary > diversity requires all manner of multidisciplinary scientists become > interested and contribute. I intend to be one of those. > > So having 'shaken the tree' I'll leave it at that for now. I'll come > back with publications to discuss and we can pick up the science of AGI > from there. The first paper will be an objective test for > P-consciousness in an artificial agent. A test I hope everyone's AGI > candidates will be subjected to....so, back to work for me. > > enjoy. > > regards > Colin Hales > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> *agi* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/> | Modify >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> >> Your Subscription [Powered by Listbox] <http://www.listbox.com> >> > > > > ------------------------------------------- > 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/?&; > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > ------------------------------------------- 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=117534816-b15a34 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
