2008/7/21 John LaMuth [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Announcing the recently issued U.S. patent concerning ethical artificial
intelligence titled: Inductive Inference Affective Language Analyzer
Simulating AI.
This just show what a farce the US patent system has become.
Perhaps like Bob, I'm not sure whether this isn't a leg-pull. But, to take it
seriously, how do you propose to give your robot free will - especially
considering that the vast majority of AI/AGI-ers roboticists are still
committed to an algorithmic paradigm which both excludes free will and
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 12:59 PM, Matt Mahoney wrote:
This is a real patent, unfortunately...
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect2=PTO1Sect2=HITOFFp=1u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.htmlr=1f=Gl=50d=PALLRefSrch=yesQuery=PN%2F6587846
But I think it will expire before anyone has the
2008/7/21 Matt Mahoney [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
This is a real patent, unfortunately...
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect2=PTO1Sect2=HITOFFp=1u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.htmlr=1f=Gl=50d=PALLRefSrch=yesQuery=PN%2F6587846
But I think it will expire before anyone has the technology
BillK: I prefer Warren Ellis's angry, profane Three Laws of Robotics.
(linked from BoingBoing)
http://www.warrenellis.com/?p=5426
Actually, while I take Ellis' point as in
1...what are you thinking? Ooh, I must protect the bag of meat at all
costs because I couldn't possibly plug in the
Seems like this is getting to be a regualr event on the AGI, or other
singularity-related lists: about once a year or so some crackpot
announces that they have filed a patent for a complete thinking machine,
or a robot-ethics system or some other garbage.
The other crackpot announcement we
Steve,
Principal component analysis is not new, it has a long history, and so
far it is a very long way from being the basis for a complete AGI, let
alone a theory of everything in computer science.
Is there any concrete reason to believe that this particular PCA paper
is doing something
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 10:32 PM, Richard Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Steve,
Principal component analysis is not new, it has a long history, and so far
it is a very long way from being the basis for a complete AGI, let alone a
theory of everything in computer science.
Is there any
In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [agi] Patterns and Automata
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 17:26:43 -0600
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index:
