MIKE SAID> But the point I made is a good one, & needs insisting on. It is indeed immoral for an AGI curriculum to lead others into similar ways without providing some health warning. MIKE SAID> You can indeed lead others to waste years of their lives - and yes, that is immoral. SERGIO REPLIES> You are right, except that Ben is convinced he is on the right track and therefore not immoral. I also admire your persistence even when confronting formidable adversaries. You do have a point, you can't explain it very clearly, but you keep trying. That's honorable. Don't give up (but don't waste too much of our time).
BEN SAID> we *are* building real systems and experimenting with them and improving them as we go along. SERGIO REPLIES> This work is narrow AI, and will never result in AGI. I support your work because it accumulates experience and will be useful to compare with AGI results. To obtain AGI, you must study the simplicity underlying the complexity of systems. Then you will be able to understand the complexity. If you limit yourself to studying the complexity, then, all you get is more and more complexity. BEN SAID>It just takes time ... like with many other things in the history of science and engineering... SERGIO REPLIES> Of course. But it always takes one man, with one idea, to change all that. Make sure that you are ready for that. Sergio -----Original Message----- From: Ben Goertzel [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, June 08, 2012 10:31 AM To: AGI Subject: Re: [agi] The Visual Alphabet On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Mike Tintner <[email protected]> wrote: > Ben, > > If you, Boris et al wish to be Don Quixote's who refuse to subject > their ideas/systems to any real, empirical test, (a la Don Q), that > is your right. But Mike, we *are* building real systems and experimenting with them and improving them as we go along -- we are not armchair theorists. It just takes time to proceed with this sort of work... like with many other things in the history of science and engineering... ben g > But the point I made is a good one, & needs insisting on. It is indeed > immoral for an AGI curriculum to lead others into similar ways without > providing some health warning. A proper technological field should > have an insistence on empirical testing. Yours signally *doesn't*. > It's psi in more ways than one. > > You can indeed lead others to waste years of their lives - and yes, > that is immoral. And your (I presume) subconscious recognition of > this is why you responded so emotionally & extensively. > ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-c97d2393 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-2484a968 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
