;m a dilettante. I am most interested in spending my time wondering how
small a chunk of "code" could implement AGI. I believe that the physical
and cultural structure of a human being's environment provide the vast
majority of the complexity of a human mind, and there ma
On 4/16/07, Benjamin Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The AGI systems humans create will be understandable by humans in
principle.
Agreed.
But let's call these AGI0
Then, AGI0 will create AGI1, which will be understandable by AGI0 in
principle...
And, AGI1 will create
Is there a standard taxonomy of AGI that is referred to when talking about
different AGIs or near AGIs? Saying that a software is an AGI or not an AGI
is not descriptive enough. There are probably very few AGIs but many close
AGIs and then many, many AIs. Software programs are like the plant
from http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/geekend/?p=696
Bruce Sterling: All blogs will die by 2018
a.. Date: June 5th, 2007
b.. Blogger: The Trivia Geek
Security expert and tech curmudgeon Bruce Sterling famously quipped at this
year's South-by-Southwest conference that "I don't think there w
Hi,
I put a brief introduction to AGI at
http://nars.wang.googlepages.com/AGI-Intro.htm , including an "AGI
Overview" followed by "Representative AGI Projects".
It is basically a bunch of links and quotations organized according to
my opinion. Hopefully it can help some ne
se is
fairly self evident. My question is what will be the motivations behind AGI
behavior?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs
I believe you can trace most human motivation back to our biological origin.
Even some higher level needs related to self-esteem can be traced ba
Hi,
Some time ago I promised Eliezer a response on question he posed regarding
"AGI morality."
I was hoping I'd find the time to write a really detailed response,
mirroring the detailed ideas on the topic that exist in my mind. But that
time has not arisen, and so I'm g
Hi folks,
I'm a new member of this AGI email group. I would like to find out if those of you who are living in the Washington DC metro area are sometimes getting together (IRL) to discuss AGI related algorithms. If so then let me know please.
Thanks,
Jiri Jelinek
Senior Software Engineer
Hi all,
I'm curious about the general sentiments that people have
about the appropriate level of openness for an AGI project.
My mind certainly isn't made up on the issue and I can see
reasons for going either way. If a single individual or
small group of people made a sudden break
Ciao Ben,
Is the AGI book published yet?
I see that Amazon says that it can be ordered, but I haven't seen
you mention the book here on the AGI list?
Cheers
Shane
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
---
To unsubscribe, change your addres
We need to identify AGI bottlenecks and tackle them systematically.
Basically the AGI problem is to:
1. design a knowledge representation
2. design learning algorithms
3. fill the thing with knowledge
The difficulties are:
1. the KR may be inadequate, but the designer doesn't know
James: you said you're building a wiki-style AGI, and I've heard another guy
with a similar idea. I want to know if you intend it to have free
contributions or is there a way to pay the contributors?
It sounds like a good idea, I'm interested to help, but if it's free I&#
I saw the following post from Antonio Alberti, on the linked-in
discussion group:
>ALife and AGI
>
>Dear group participants.
>
>The relation among AGI and ALife greatly interests me. However, too few recent
>works try to relate them. For exemple, many papers presented in AG
el.
Even a small gain over a year can mount to a large number over many years
and in early times, the learning curve will steep.
Dan G.
>From : Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To :
Subject : Re: [agi] (AGI) Start up cost...
Dat
http://modularai.corecoding.com is the Modular AI Project.
http://modularai.messageforums.net/general-discussion_f3.html
is where AI enthusiasts may pick a language to code Modular AI.
http://modularai.messageforums.net/c-for-modular-ai_t37.html
http://modularai.messageforums.net/c-for-modular-ai
index.html
http://dir.salon.com/story/tech/feature/2003/02/27/loebner_part_2/index.html
And briefly discussed on this list here:
http://www.mail-archive.com/agi@v2.listbox.com/msg01155.html
On the one hand, I respect that someone set up a contest modeled after
the Turing Test. On the other hand, there
s not true for most list members.
I'll start.
I'm a dilettante. I am most interested in spending my time wondering how
small a chunk of "code" could implement AGI. I believe that the physical
and cultural structure of a human being's environment provide the vast
majority
Derek, great idea. Here's my story/interest
Ever since a kid (and playing with the very first computers) I have
been fascinated & intrigued by the concept of AGI (tho not necessarily
by that name). I've had a number of different career paths and many
different hobbies
physicist, have done more
professional software development than I care to think about, and have
also done other work.
I have a specific framework that encapsulates how I think an AGI should
be designed. I have made a number of references to this framework in
various places, but have not yet p
#x27;m
building a Speech Recognition/TTS IVR for a pharmaceutical company... just
rolling it live.
I consider myself an entry level AGIer but have been following along (lurking)
for at least 10 years. I feel strongly that many of the answers in AGI design
lie in group theory and category theor
- Original Message -
From: "DEREK ZAHN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 10:07 AM
Subject: [agi] AGI interests
> It would be interesting to see what basic interests and views the members
of
> this list hold. For a few people, published wo
;m a freshman in college pursuing an electrical engineering
degree with a leaning towards CS. My interest in AGI started a few years
ago and has recently started to grow rapidly, to the point that I now hope
to enter a career involved in either AGI programming or neural interfacing
work. I'm
I don't believe AI in the sense of a self-willed mind is going to happen;
fortunately, it doesn't need to. The two problems I want to help solve are
the global loss of fifty million lives a year, and the difficulty in living
in the 99.999...999% of the universe that isn't Earth. Each of these is a
on the AGI problem for some 25+ years in my spare time
which unfortunately is scarce.
I also use .Net but I developed a (recursive) Web Service that mimics
the functions of a Neuron. I use SQL2005 as the means to define the
Neurons in my artificial brain. This is at least my latest attempt after
sicologist and avant-garde composer. Much of my interest in music
involves the level of incorporation of technology into music: the paradox of
the recorded (or mic'ed) acoustic or a cappella performances, for instance.
I have almost no technical experience with AGI. The fact that I'
*my* concept of AGI to the concept level
and above. I am not doing any sensory work other than with textual and
electronic data (well, except for some dabbling in two-dimensional image
reading for a specific project). I think that this is a rational partition and
does not violate the Genera
As you might know, my interest is data compression. Its relation to AGI is
explained in http://cs.fit.edu/~mmahoney/compression/rationale.html
To summarize, you need to solve AI to compress text well. I don't pretend to
know how to do that. But I do claim that it is a better way to me
I have been working on AGI seriously since 2004. I also believe that the
"core" algorithms needed for AGI could be very compact (though I won't make
an estimation of its size), with the rest of the information encoded
"declaratively" in the knowledgebase.
In a nutshe
--- "YKY (Yan King Yin)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have been working on AGI seriously since 2004. I also believe that the
> "core" algorithms needed for AGI could be very compact (though I won't make
> an estimation of its size), with the rest of
On 3/28/07, rooftop8000 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
if you go commercial, it will force you to focus on the wrong
things to get direct results. There is no money in AGI (it takes too
long..
its exact aim is to avoid quick applications.. someone can just steal
your ideas once they are dev
--- "YKY (Yan King Yin)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One thing that I really don't understand is why so many people I've talked
> to about AGI insist on working for free. If you can give me a little
> explanation (of your view), I'd greatly appreciat
On 3/27/07, YKY (Yan King Yin) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
One thing that I really don't understand is why so many people I've talked
to about AGI insist on working for free.
Do you have a source of finance? This is not a rhetorical question; if you
have, I'd be very inte
m in the
mathematics|theory domain and needs competent programmers (which I'm
very far from being at this point, even after 10 years in the field)
as a fan of AGI: watching the smart guys (like Novamente) do the real
work of laying out the problem domain in theory and positing solutions
that
lso I believe getting subsequent VC funding is not that
difficult.
But it seems that AGI is more complex than a conventional startup.
It is not programming that is the problem, at least not yet. Currently we
need the ability of a group of people to come up with *algorithms* that work
within a
On 3/29/07, YKY (Yan King Yin) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yes, I think I have "seed" capital, that is enough to get a conventional
startup started. Also I believe getting subsequent VC funding is not that
difficult.
That's more than most people have! I think the reaso
ds competent programmers (which I'm
very far from being at this point, even after 10 years in the field)
as a fan of AGI: watching the smart guys (like Novamente) do the real
work of laying out the problem domain in theory and positing solutions
that make the leap between sound logic and run
I'm graduating with my BS in Computer Science specialized in AI this fall,
and then probably doing the MSAI program here at UGA. Eventually I want to
be at the level where I can contribute real progress towards AGI/FAI.
Maybe after I get my MS try to join an AGI project (e.g Novamente,
On 3/26/07, John Rose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I consider myself an entry level AGI'er but have been following along (lurking)
for at least 10 years. I feel strongly that many of the answers in AGI design
lie in group theory and category theory
What do you mean by that?
&q
t's relevant to the foundations of functional programming, for example
Personally I don't think it's all that relevant to AGI engineering,
except insofar as an AGI system may use functional programming methods
for procedure representation.
However, I do think category theory mig
ng to see what basic interests and views the members
of
this list hold. For a few people, published works answer this pretty
clearly but that's not true for most list members.
I'll start.
I'm a dilettante. I am most interested in spending my time wondering how
small a chunk of &
ns less hardware for storage (RAM, Disk, etc.),
and less bandwidth.
John
-Original Message-
From: Benjamin Goertzel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 5:18 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [agi] AGI interests
> I only know that category theory is
idth.
John
-Original Message-
From: Benjamin Goertzel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 5:18 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [agi] AGI interests
> I only know that category theory is some more rarified and
> specialized type of group theory. I'd li
Here is a chunk of code generously donated by a Dr. Peter Ivankov which is a
nice start on a Category Theory (CT) engine or perhaps some sort of
representation mixing machine... I was thinking of taking this and having it
operate over the Wordnet DB or some open source Ontology. The fun part
would
There is an easy assumption of most writers on this board that once the AGI
exists, it's route to becoming a singularity is a sure thing. Why is that? In
humans there is a wide range of "smartness" in the population. People face
intellectual thresholds that they cannot cross be
ilities, this alone
would suffice to require humans to stay in the loop.
The point of all this isn't to pour cold water on people's ideas, it's to
point out that we will make more progress if we stop thinking of AGI as a
human child. It's a completely different kind of thing, and more
eveloped in a fairly brief
time-frame (i.e. during *my* lifetime), I am also extremely interested in
(Friendly!) motivational systems.
For *my* purposes, I am limiting *my* concept of AGI to the concept level
and above. I am not doing any sensory work other than with textual and
e
Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: As you might know, my interest is data
compression. Its relation to AGI is explained in
http://cs.fit.edu/~mmahoney/compression/rationale.html
To summarize, you need to solve AI to compress text well. I don't pretend to
know how to do that
On 4/18/07, James Ratcliff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Mark,
This is the closest Ive seen so far to my work and what I believe in,
Have you got some more specific information / code / algorithm / papers on
gathering and processing world information and discovery of?
I have been working with
d therefore likely to advance you past previous systems)?
Mark
- Original Message -
From: James Ratcliff
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 3:10 PM
Subject: Re: [agi] AGI interests
Mark,
This is the closest Ive seen so far to my work
s / rules.
Why does it seem easier? No one has gotten it to work in the past. What
do you think you know that they don't?
To me, it seems much easier to have an automated system encode the
facts/rules.
Mark
- Original Message -
From: YKY (Yan King Yin)
"YKY (Yan King Yin)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 4/18/07, James Ratcliff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mark,
> This is the closest Ive seen so far to my work and what I believe in, Have
> you got some more specific information / code / algorithm / papers on
> gathering and processing worl
have an automated system encode the
facts/rules.
Mark
- Original Message -
From:YKY (Yan King Yin)
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 3:30PM
Subject: Re: [agi] AGI interests
On 4/18/07, James Ratcliff <[EMAIL PROTE
On 4/17/07, James Ratcliff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
A simple list, or set of goals for an AGI to accomplish reasonably I would
find very useful, and something to work for.
I'm not entirely optimistic about getting everyone on this list to agree on
such, but if I were to boil
AIL
PROTECTED]> wrote: A simple list, or set of goals for an AGI to accomplish
reasonably I would find very useful, and something to work for.
I'm not entirely optimistic about getting everyone on this list to agree on
such, but if I were to boil it down, I think the goal to aim for is t
nance, etc. Cyc
actually has all of these things, so it seems to me that Cyc fails for more
subtle reasons.
I think the goal of the project is to be able to answer queries about the
stories etc. Explicit reconstruction of the videos is not essential, as we
can be sure that the AGI actually under
Mark Waser wrote:
To me, it seems much easier to have an automated system encode the
facts/rules.
Indeed ... but obviously, no one has solved the NLP problem... there
are no semantic analysis systems out there that can map complex
sentences into logical relationships in an adequately reliab
On 4/17/07, YKY (Yan King Yin) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think the goal of the project is to be able to answer queries about the
stories etc. Explicit reconstruction of the videos is not essential, as we
can be sure that the AGI actually understands things by asking it question
om: "Benjamin Goertzel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 10:04 PM
Subject: Re: [agi] AGI interests
Mark Waser wrote:
To me, it seems much easier to have an automated system encode the
facts/rules.
Indeed ... but obviously, no one has solved the NLP p
Hi Mark,
Preposition disambiguation is "badly unsolved" because (I believe) it
requires domain knowledge to do effectively and people are trying to do it
without domain knowledge. The same is true of reference resolution. I
think that these things are eminently soluble once you have the domain
Straight parsing the web runs into nasty problems really quickly, mainly lack
of trusted sources and bad grammar to parse.
You have to restrict it to a much smaller set of data items, such as novels,
news sources, or something like wikipedia... These mediums all provide you
with a good deal o
c. Explicit reconstruction of the videos is not essential, as we can
be sure that the AGI actually understands things by asking it questions that
require spatio-temporal reasoning.
Suppose we postulate that for the sake of argument - why would we want to avoid
it? The biggest pitfall of th
dge and resolving conflicts. I think
that we are attacking two very different, complementary problems.
Mark
- Original Message -
From: "Benjamin Goertzel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 9:51 AM
Subject: Re: [agi] AGI interests
Hi
A
clearer way of stating how I perceive our approaches as differing would be
to say that I believe that you are learning by discovery while I am
accumulating already discovered knowledge and resolving conflicts. I think
that we are attacking two very different, complementary problems.
My hypot
Using stats on a huge realm of text can help with both the proposition problem,
and the domain knowledge creation both. By simply searching "baseball" you
start getting a connection network of items and interaction that describe that
domain, and many prepositions are statisticaly tied to their
Forgot to ask, Ben do you a full print demo of the 3D system or a paper that
deals directly with that yet?
Im goign to try and install it later today and start working with it some. Is
it only linux based?
James Ratcliff
Benjamin Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Mark,
> Preposition disa
Hi James,
For specific guidance on installing AGISim you should go to the SourceForge page
http://sourceforge.net/projects/agisim/
and ideally join the sourceforge mailing list for the AGISim project.
I am not sure if AGISim has been ported to Windows or not, someone on
that list can tell you.
h a really kick-ass
argument resolution system, I'll be pretty ecstatic too.
- Original Message -
From: "Benjamin Goertzel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 10:43 AM
Subject: Re: [agi] AGI interests
A
clearer way of stating how I perce
Guys,
Your both right!
Well, I think you need both really, but they do compliment and help eachother
out, much information is given in text, and to ignore that means at some point
in time you will be telling the bot that, over and over, to teach it, and
likewise, there are something your just
On 4/18/07, Russell Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 4/17/07, YKY (Yan King Yin) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think the goal of the project is to be able to answer queries about
the stories etc. Explicit reconstruction of the videos is not essential, as
we can be su
On 4/18/07, YKY (Yan King Yin) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From my perspective, video generation is not required for AGI. It could
be an impressive demo, but that's all. Am I missing your point? What kind
of application can you think of for video generation? How can it &quo
hat an AGI should look like could be described
as a smart CAD program.
Now, I agree answering commonsense queries would also be useful, and by
all means let that also be a feature. But what will happen to a project that
focuses _only_ on text I/O? I can answer that: short-term progress using
trick
On 4/19/07, YKY (Yan King Yin) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It is actually a creative process to render what is in the 'mind' to a
visual form. In a sense it is similar to the task of NL generation.
Oh yes, absolutely.
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsub
in areas like movies, video games, mechanical engineering,
> architecture; my vision of what an AGI should look like could be described as
> a smart CAD program.
>
> Now, I agree answering commonsense queries would also be useful, and by all
> means let that also be a feature.
There's certainly no standard... at
http://www.agiri.org/wiki/index.php?title=AGI_Projects
I used 3 crude categories
-- Neural net based
-- Logic based
-- Integrative
;-)
On 5/9/07, John G. Rose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is there a standard taxonomy of AGI that is refer
other things in ways that humans have a harder
time relating to
Josh
On Wednesday 09 May 2007 06:14, John G. Rose wrote:
> Is there a standard taxonomy of AGI that is referred to when talking about
> different AGIs or near AGIs? Saying that a software is an AGI or not an
> A
My feeling is that it is better to classify the AGI projects alone
multiple dimensions, rather than a single one.
1. Their exact goal (or their working definition of intelligence). On
this aspect, I've tried to put them into 5 groups:
* structure (e.g., to build brain model)
* beh
g a design stance rather than a capability level
Parahuman AI -- designed to work alongside humans and relate
Allohuman AI -- optimized for other things in ways that humans have a
harder
time relating to
Josh
On Wednesday 09 May 2007 06:14, John G. Rose wrote:
> Is there a standard taxonomy of AG
Notice that I didn't use the word "intelligence" -- the key issue here is when
we can expect the existence of AGI to make a significant difference in the
world. Computers have had a big impact because they have abilities well
beyond those of humans in certain limited areas. Of
Just been looking at the vids. of last year's AGI conference. One thing
really hit me from the panel talk - and that was: but, of course, only
open-source AGI will ever work. Sorry, but all these ideas of individual
systems, produced by teams of - what? - say, twenty individuals at
e searching the software fossil
record, looking though garbage dumps and finding old hard drives with
partial data images, the software's will be classified systematically.
John
> From: Pei Wang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> My feeling is that it is better to classify the AGI project
, the fee
being proportional to the total estimated worth of its "constituents".
4. Also, everyone who participates, must sign a non-disclosure and
non-competitive agreement (NDA & NCA). There should also be some way to
verify the person's identity.
5. I think this scheme c
There're several reasons why AGI teams are fragmented and AGI designers
don't want to join a consortium:
A. believe that one's own AGI design is superior
B. want to ensure that the global outcome of AGI is "friendly"
C. want to get bigger financial rewards
(A)
On 6/8/07, Mark Waser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"You are never going to see a painting by committee that is a great
painting."
And he's right. This was Sterling's indictment of Wikipedia–and to the
"wisdom of crowds" fad sweeping the Web 2.0 pitch sessions of Silicon
Valley–but it's also a fai
sary for it. I do, however, agree
with his belief that a "kitchen sink" mentality is extremely detrimental to
most open sources enterprises -- and would likewise be a problem for the AGI
consortium. I think that some sort of focus and *some* limitations on what
is considered on-t
On Friday 08 June 2007 08:21:28 am Mark Waser wrote:
> Opening your project up to an unreliable parade of volunteer contributors
allows for a great, lowest-common-denominator consensus product. That's fine
for Wikipedia, but I wouldn't count on any grand intellectual discourse
arising therein. S
On 6/8/07, J Storrs Hall, PhD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This is basically right. There are plenty of innovative Open Source programs
out there, but they are typically some academic's thesis work. Being Open
Source can allow them to be turned into solid usable applications, but it
can't create th
p projects within the consortium
*exclusively*... but this will turn off many people as they don't see why
the consortium will win instead of other projects... and this is the
problem faced by all AGI founders trying to recruit...
YKY
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agi
Apache and its various offshoots? Linux itself? KDE? JBoss and its
subprojects? Hibernate? None of these came from some academic thesis work
and all are wildly successful. So I do not agree with the characterization
of Open Source.
- s
On 6/8/07, J Storrs Hall, PhD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrot
Sure. Successful and innovative aren't the same thing -- in fact, they're
often at odds. The best versions of something from the point of polish and
usability generally come after lots of hard experience with its earlier
versions.
Bell Labs, where Unix came from originally, was very academe-lik
Really Open Source software projects almost never have a total open door
policy on the contributions that are accepted. There is usually a small
group that determines whether contributed changes are good enough and fit
the overall project goals and architecture well enough.
Wikipedia is one of
Well-said Samantha :-)
On a different note: something YKY and Mark may want to read about a
possible approach to running a new AGI consortium: eXtreme Research. A
software methodology for applied research: eXtreme Researching vy
Olivier Chirouze, David Cleary and George G. Mitchell (Software
ernative that's left is to restrict
members to participate and develop projects within the consortium
*exclusively*... but this will turn off many people as they don't see why
the consortium will win instead of other projects... and this is the
problem faced by all AGI founders trying to recr
>> Think: if you have contributed something, it'd be in your best interest to
>> give accurate estimates rather than exaggerate or depreciate them
Why wouldn't it be to my advantage to exaggerate my contributions?
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe
On 6/9/07, Mark Waser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...Same goes for most software developed by this method–almost
all the great open source apps are me-too knockoffs of innovative
proprietary programs, and those that are original were almost always created
under the watchful eye of a passionate, in
On 6/9/07, Mark Waser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Think: if you have contributed something, it'd be in your best
interest to give accurate estimates rather than exaggerate or depreciate
them
Why wouldn't it be to my advantage to exaggerate my contributions?
But your peers in the network wo
Obviously innovation comes from all walks of life, be they opensource or
commercial people. But some entrepreneurs are more capable of appropriating
their "inventions", eg Edison did *not* invent the light bulb, but he got
famous for commercializing and patenting it. Many people simply don't hav
YKY> Think: if you have contributed something, it'd be in your best interest
to give accurate estimates rather than exaggerate or depreciate them
MW> Why wouldn't it be to my advantage to exaggerate my contributions?
YKY> But your peers in the network won't allow that.
That is an entirely diff
On 6/10/07, Mark Waser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
YKY> Think: if you have contributed something, it'd be in your best
interest to give accurate estimates rather than exaggerate or depreciate
them
MW> Why wouldn't it be to my advantage to exaggerate my contributions?
YKY> But your peers in th
I'm going to temporarily ignore my doubts about accurate assessments to try
to get my initial question answered yet again.
Why wouldn't it be to my advantage to exaggerate my contributions?
- Original Message -
From: YKY (Yan King Yin)
To: agi@v2.listbox.c
On 6/11/07, Mark Waser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm going to temporarily ignore my doubts about accurate assessments
to try to get my initial question answered yet again.
Why wouldn't it be to my advantage to exaggerate my contributions?
I'm sorry about the confusion. Let me corre
1 - 100 of 9890 matches
Mail list logo
