I think you make a lot of good points. The problem with trying to work in AGI is the sheer enormity of the problem, and many people are working on different things, and just don't have the time to devote to lengthy investigations. A forum where everybody committed to giving some thought to the same problem, say for a a week or such might help. The issue with a message board is that everybody is talking about something different having different opinions. Dismissiveness is common too, in some people who are convinced only their method will work.
On 2/24/14, Jim Bromer <[email protected]> wrote: > I am going to ban myself from the group for a year. There is such a > fundamental disconnect between what I am trying to tell you and what I hear > you saying that do not believe that there is a good reason for me > to continue to try to participate in this group. I do not like sounding so > arrogant but I cannot escape the conclusion that the rest of you have > been incapable of understanding what I have been trying to say. I do not > think the rest of you are totally clueless. However, I can't recall a > single example where someone reacted in a way that would suggest that he > actually understood the main points of what I was trying to say. And as a > result, my ability to learn from you is almost entirely negative. As I keep > seeing the signs of this intellectual disconnect I find it more difficult > to ignore the conclusion that my perception of our fundamental differences > over the nature of intelligence and the best way to create more genuine > artificial intelligence must be real and substantial. > > When I have read the writing of someone who acted like he knew something > that the rest of us did not, I would challenge him and say that if you know > how to do it then just do it. The problem is that I do not know all the > answers that I need. I do not know how to resolve all > conceptual complexity or conceptual integration. However, the main benefit > that I am getting from these groups is negative. When I see that someone is > missing something that I am trying to tell him about, I see those > differences more starkly. However, there is a real question whether I am > learning something new when I am forced to find more creative ways to get > someone to think about this stuff or if the recognition just helps refresh > my memory. Something that seems trivially true because it is so obvious can > easily get lost. But I never really lost it. > > The problem with dismissiveness is that we can understand something and > even see some implications of the knowledge without seeing the > greater effectiveness of the idea. (That is what you seem incapable of > comprehending. The words "idea" and "effective" have more than one > application. It's like poetry maybe? The problem is that the subtleties of > the distinctions between programs of the second kind and programs of the > third kind are too consequential to ignore even though they (probably) are > purely conceptual constructs. You have to construct artificial definitions > to highlight those distinctions in order to see their consequences in your > own plans.) > > Jim Bromer > > > > ------------------------------------------- > AGI > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/11943661-d9279dae > 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
