I was just talking about the issues that we can guess will interfere with our plans. Verification by seeing how statements (concepts or concept-like parts of knowledge) are transformed by categorized methods into other useful statements is a wonderful idea which is definitely part of my plan. But, it would be ridiculous for me not to examine the theory more carefully. Can it be used to induct false verification or partially false verifications? The answer, once I thought about it for a few minutes, was obvious. Of course it could.
So if a solution is feasible it would have to be built on a number of different possible 'verification' methods. These methods can produce false verifications or irrelevant verifications but by looking for complimentary verification methods we might be able to find stronger groups of 'verification' methods. So there would have to be many different 'verification' methods based on the knowledge that any of them could fail or partially fail sometime and the best strategy in their use is to find complimentary methods with strong track records for solving certain kinds of problems. This strategy will also fail sometimes so this complimentary grouping has to be extensive. A theory is not easily or quickly proven. This paragraph may not seem like a revelation, but the failure to formally recognize it and to be able to easily recognize its implications is a big mistake. ------------------------------------------- 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
