Stephen Reed wrote: > >From the viewpoint of a developer working to overcome the perceived > deficiencies of Cyc with regard to AGI, I ask what problems do you see > with Cyc technology as you understand it? I promise not to debate nor > to attempt to change your mind.
Cyc is really strange. It takes the one *optional* component of human resaoning (the high level abstract logic) and implements it _perfectly_ but ignores the stuff that really needs to be there. (the stuff that looks for signals in the input stream and the stuf that dictates top-level goals). At this stage in the game it is far more urgent to write a sim-redneck who "don't think so good". But will be able to learn to dance the polka just like anyone else. Once we reach that point, the abstract reasoning becomes relevant. The system might be powerful enough to learn how to reason just as humans do but it would probably be more efficient to design reasoning software that will accelerate the process. At that point you would be firmly in SI teritory... So if I ever get my new computer functional (the post-office lost a $140 ram module; can't afford another), I'll be trying to implement something that will try to use a GUI program just as a human would... (by looking at the color patterns and moving a mouse and typing.) -- pain (n): see Linux. http://users.rcn.com/alangrimes/ ------- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/
