On 7/20/2013 9:14 AM, Jim Bromer wrote:
Text seems brittle because it was tried and it did not work.
But neither did visual, robotic, or other sensor-based AGI. If the
brittleness criticism was based on a lack of substantial achievement
in spite of the effort, then the brittleness criticism would have to
be applied to all AGI modalities. Of course knowledge that is
gathered only through text is going to be brittle in the sense that it
would not be able to achieve the range of understanding that human
beings can achieve, but the use of cell phones or robotics are not
going to create genuine human experiences either.
The only conclusion, based on the acceptance of a general lack
of substantial advancement in the field, is that we do not have basic
AGI because computers cannot achieve general intelligence or general
intelligence needs even more advanced hardware than we have or there
has been something important missing in AGI research.
Something that Bayesian enthusiasts never talk about in these
discussion groups is how can a mostly independent learning system make
the distinction between those kinds of situations where Bayesian
methods can be used to combine different sources of data from those
cases where different sources of weighted values can't be combined or
have to be combined in a certain way.
I wonder if you could describe an example of what you mean here?
As you may know, the Microsoft Troubleshooter uses a Bayesian approach...
____________________________________________________________
Moviefone - Official Site
Find the Latest Movie Showtimes and Your Nearest Theaters at Moviefone.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/51eac945f239f49456d4est01duc
-------------------------------------------
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
