gts wrote: > > Well, although I am not an AI developer, I am a C++ > application developer and I know I or any reasonably > skilled developer could write task-specific > applications that would be extremely coherent in the > De Finetti sense (applicable to making probabilistic > judgements in horse-racing, casinos, the stockmarket, > whatever). These applications would make mincemeat > of humans in any test of coherence. Such applications > already exist, come to think of it. > > So I think people should be optimistic about coherence in AGI, not > pessimistic.
Gordon, as a programmer you must then be aware of the well-known impracticality of testing and certifying any (non-trivial) program as completely free of bugs or unexpected failure modes. Doesn't this strike you as being the same problem as expecting essentially perfect coherence or consistency from any subjective agent, whether biological or machine? - Jef ----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303
