You're quite right that arguing whether computer intelligence will be
like human intelligence is not the point, but how we can make computer
intelligence useful. The ways you've been pointing out for how
computers can mine the 'Rosetta stone' type archives that people of all
kinds put together, a
Phil Henshaw wrote:
> Are you saying that the 'contextualize'
> function extracts the meanings of the words though, and looks for other
> associations with those meanings, or does it just reflect things like
> frequency and proximity of occurrence.
>
The purpose of the contextualize function i
.com
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marcus G. Daniels
> Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2007 10:43 AM
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Can you guess the source. - on Earth
On Sun, Apr 22, 2007 at 09:45:11AM -0400, Phil Henshaw wrote:
>
> 1. the product Corian is a solid plastic countertop material that became
> popular, and the term began to be used to describe the whole class of
> similar products that began to develop. Then someone came up with the
> replacement
Phil Henshaw wrote:
> How would a computer be able to suggest that
> when you search for 'Corian' you might actually be looking for 'solid
> surface'. You might assume that the original discussion that
> associated the terms was not coded, and only the gradual change in usage
> can be documented
Marcus,
...so, maybe you answered the question, or maybe not. Take two
examples, and suggest what in the world a computer could do to project
associations across the natural disconnects between meanings that people
experience. I think they might demonstrate that 'different concepts'
can't be asso
