> -----Original Message----- > From: Mike Tintner [mailto:[email protected]] > > > However I suspect - and correct me here - concepts are best understood as > extremely fluid outline "MAPS" rather than "analogs" of objects and object > actions. My impression is that analog has a fairly precise meaning in > computation, which has nothing to do with fluid outline maps. > > If so, that is what we ideally need - not an analog computer/robot, but a > ***mapping computer** that can fluidly, loosely map the world and map its > body onto the world - a *retinal* computer. (The retina if you think about it > does indeed literally fluidly and distortedly map the objects of the world - > distortions which have to be corrected by the brain). > >
I think that the human brain uses input as symbols and dynamically abstracts and operates via algebraic structure of the input... MAPS of data and operations from instance input specifics into the generalized abstract space of situational computational commonalities. BTW I'm still thinking about your patchwork ideas, the wall of vagina et al :) I've been preoccupied over the past couple months. I think with your patchworks you are pointing at something important, the articulation of that might be confusing with other conceptual concoctions since the space and symbols that we are operating in must be used to describe the system itself, causing obfuscation. John ------------------------------------------- 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
