Sent: Friday, 14 September 2018 5:55 AM
> To: AGI
> Subject: Re: [agi] Growing Knowledge
>
>
> On Wed, 12 Sep 2018 at 15:26, Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via AGI
> wrote:
>
> Evn with all its bureaucracy, France has not (officially) and never had a
> single head of A
A good and fair challenge. I'll just have to find my source.
From: Basile Starynkevitch
Sent: Friday, 14 September 2018 5:55 AM
To: AGI
Subject: Re: [agi] Growing Knowledge
On Wed, 12 Sep 2018 at 15:26, Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via AGI
mailt
On Wed, 12 Sep 2018 at 15:26, Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via AGI
mailto:agi@agi.topicbox.com>> wrote:
Jim
Bootstrapping a computational platform with domain knowledge
(seeding with insights), was already done a few years ago by the
ex head of AI research in France. I need
Bromer via AGI
Sent: Wednesday, 12 September 2018 10:34 PM
To: AGI
Subject: Re: [agi] Growing Knowledge
Your attempt to declare that I stated two opinions that were
"self-refuting" just because you disagreed with them is nonsense. If I
had any idea how I could help you I would try
y, or don't. Please be clear and defend your point. I would welcome
> the debate, but if you could not care to, then rather admit you are just
> trying to throw a spanner in the works of this most-useful, constructive
> discussion.
>
> Rob
> __
Agreed
Rob
From: Jim Bromer via AGI
Sent: Wednesday, 12 September 2018 9:25 PM
To: AGI
Subject: Re: [agi] Growing Knowledge
The meta discussion is tedious.
Jim Bromer
On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 3:13 PM Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via
AGI wrote:
>
&g
is most-useful, constructive
> discussion.
>
> Rob
> ________________
> From: Jim Bromer via AGI
> Sent: Wednesday, 12 September 2018 8:21 PM
> To: AGI
> Subject: Re: [agi] Growing Knowledge
>
> How could I possibly know what you missed (without ex
spanner in the works of this most-useful, constructive discussion.
Rob
From: Jim Bromer via AGI
Sent: Wednesday, 12 September 2018 8:21 PM
To: AGI
Subject: Re: [agi] Growing Knowledge
How could I possibly know what you missed (without extensive and
tedious meta-co
__
> From: Jim Bromer via AGI
> Sent: Wednesday, 12 September 2018 4:47 PM
> To: AGI
> Subject: Re: [agi] Growing Knowledge
>
> In general, you can't actually "refute" my thinking. If I made some
> hypothesis which could be tested in an e
From: Jim Bromer via AGI
Sent: Wednesday, 12 September 2018 4:47 PM
To: AGI
Subject: Re: [agi] Growing Knowledge
In general, you can't actually "refute" my thinking. If I made some
hypothesis which could be tested in an experiment you might refute the
hypot
to Find, Frame, Make and Share. This would denote
> another radical departure in current thinking (I did come across a similar
> approach recently).
>
> Rob
>
> ____________
> From: Jim Bromer via AGI
> Sent: Wednesday, 12 September 2018 2:25 PM
>
2018 4:21 PM
To: AGI
Subject: Re: [agi] Growing Knowledge
That sounds interesting, please look it up if you can.
On Wed, 12 Sep 2018 at 15:26, Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via AGI
mailto:agi@agi.topicbox.com>> wrote:
Jim
Bootstrapping a computational platform with domain knowled
> another radical departure in current thinking (I did come across a similar
> approach recently).
>
> Rob
>
> --
> *From:* Jim Bromer via AGI
> *Sent:* Wednesday, 12 September 2018 2:25 PM
> *To:* a...@listbox.com
> *Subject:* [agi] Gro
would denote another radical
departure in current thinking (I did come across a similar approach recently).
Rob
From: Jim Bromer via AGI
Sent: Wednesday, 12 September 2018 2:25 PM
To: a...@listbox.com
Subject: [agi] Growing Knowledge
The idea that an AGI program
The idea that an AGI program has to be able to 'grow' knowledge is not
conceptually radical but the use of the idea that a program might be
seeded with certain kinds of insights does make me think about the
problem in a slightly different way. By developing a program to work
along principles that a
15 matches
Mail list logo
