Alan, Unfortunately the text formatting on gmail does not come out well on listbox. That is unfortunate since the archiving is done from listbox. Listbox is not that great a service. The plain text formatting results in text that is not fit into the window that you using and the lines of text are broken in ways that I find distracting. Jim Bromer
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Alan Grimes <[email protected]> wrote: > [META], > > I stopped trying to read the original posting because it didn't use a > convenient paragraph structure and because it used some kind of font > override that made the text two points smaller than what I'm accustomed to. > Furthermore, it shifted the color to a blue-ish hue which comes out rather > blurry on my monitor (yes, I paid $400 for a 19" 4:3 monitor, it is top of > the line). > > So no, I'm not going to read it because I feel insulted by it that I should > be expected to expend extra effort to parse it when, in all likeleyhood it > is just more drivel. =| Normally formatted quoted text is shown for > comparison's sake. > > >> Your criticism that the part of my summary that you have read so far lacks >> an Operational Definition is nonsense. Since you are not a not an active >> programmer or programmer analyst in the nascent field of AGI, you are in no >> position to understand a speculative scientific theory of AGI. >> Jim Bromer >> >> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 5:03 AM, Mike Tintner <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> What you have is a v. vague *hypothesis*. A *theory* involves >> evidence as to why it may work.. >> And you have no Operational Definition of what effect you’re >> trying to achieve. Not even the teeniest weeniest hint of an O.D. >> Tch, tch. >> *From:* Jim Bromer <mailto:[email protected]> >> *Sent:* Monday, April 15, 2013 4:14 AM >> *To:* AGI <mailto:[email protected]> >> *Subject:* [agi] Re: Summary of My Current Theory For an AGI Program. >> Part 4 >> >> Artificial imagination is also necessary for AGI.Imagination can >> >> take place simply by creating associations between concepts but >> obviously the best forms of imagination are going to be based on >> rational meaningfulness.An association between concepts or >> >> (concept objects) which cannot be interpreted as meaningful is not >> usually very useful. So it seems that if the relationship is both >> imaginative and potentially meaningful it would be advantageous.An >> association formed by a categorical substitution is more likely to >> be meaningful so I consider this a rational form of >> imagination.However, you can find many examples where a >> >> categorical substitution does not produce a meaningful >> association, so perhaps my claim that it is a rational >> > > -- > NOTICE: NEW E-MAIL ADDRESS, SEE ABOVE > > Powers are not rights. > > > > ------------------------------------------- > AGI > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/10561250-470149cf > Modify Your Subscription: > https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
