I'm saying you do have to define what your AGI will do - but define it as a tree - 1) a general class of problems - supported by 2) examples of specific types of problem within that class. I'm calling for something different to the traditional alternatives here. I doubt that anyone is doing much thinking about general CLASSES of problems. I've been trying to do it in my posts .
I understand the approach you're advocating, and I certainly **could** take it in regard to Novamente, I just don't really see any great value in taking such an approach. It wouldn't cause us to do our work any differently. Maybe it would be useful for better communicating our work to certain people, such as you, though ;-) -- Ben ----- 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/?member_id=231415&user_secret=fabd7936
