To repeat myself: the fact that no one is willing to consider alternative models to the TM is simply appalling.
The TM manifestly has never produced anything a) creative b) general or that c) works in the real (unstructured, uncontrolled) world as opposed to artificial, structured, controlled environments - and from the beginning was designed to solve only formulaic problems, and produce formulaic courses of action and manifestly not the problems of CREATING formulae, programs, and new courses of action. Its failure in all these respects is total - and totally understandable. Considering alternative models is bound, if nothing else, to stimulate ideas. Obviously we need more analogic/mapping thinking. And no machine paradigm is eternal - far, far from it. There is no excuse here - it's pure Ludditism and fear. However, trying to model a system like the brain that we don't yet understand, doesn't strike me as particularly smart. It would help a lot if people like Colin, Richard, et all stopped with their pseudo-scientific justifications of what they're doing, and just set out their ideas for a new kind of thinking machine clearly. My experience/impression is that the pseudo-scientific wrapping is there to cover up ideas that haven't been properly thought through and aren't clearly conceived. ------------------------------------------- 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
