On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 7:40 PM <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thursday, February 20, 2020, at 7:02 PM, Matt Mahoney wrote: > > Cyc was a failure. But it is interesting that in 34 years we haven't found > something better. > > > How so? Is Cyc that good? Show me, I've never seen Cyc in action.
I have, and it was pretty bad. But coding millions of common sense rules by hand in first order logic made sense when computers had 64 KB of memory and there was no internet. Cyc might have been useful with a natural language interface, but that would have been millions of more rules, and we know how those attempts have gone. Now that we have terabytes of text and the hardware to process it, statistical language models make sense. But that still isn't enough. Half of what you know (about 1 Gb) is knowledge you were born knowing, encoded in your DNA. A lot of that knowledge is still likely to require hand coding. -- -- Matt Mahoney, [email protected] ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T887757e45bfd1342-M2f03590dd52c07dd8b2d3e65 Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
