On 1/25/03 1:05 AM, "Alan Grimes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If I say too much more the rabbi will take what I've written, implement > it himself, and screw up the universe with Yahweh 2.0. I don't want > that. > > Instead I will, here, present a slightly obfuscated version that, > hopefully, won't give him the Big Insight(tm)
Well, I wouldn't worry about this too much. As far as I can tell, everything you've written so far on this is old hat conceptually, so I'm pretty sure Eliezer won't suddenly be blessed with a lightbulb over his head that he didn't have before. And I didn't even really see a problem implied or asked in your post that I don't have a good solution for, so it can certainly be done without too much effort. That said, I generally agree with your post and I have been attacking the problem of Go pretty much in this way. Of course, being able to do easy abstraction manipulation at many levels simultaneously with imprecise and partial patterns is one of the better tools in my tool chest so I like to use it. Old saws about every problem looking like a nail notwithstanding. Cheers, -James Rogers [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?[EMAIL PROTECTED]
