Thanks Richard -- No hard feelings on my part ;-)
ben > > > Ben > > I realized, too late last night, that I *did* actually say something > that was not what I intended, so you are right: my statement did > misrepresent your position. > > The message that I was trying to deliver when I mistakenly said: > > > Even Ben Goertzel, in a recent comment, said something to the effect > > that the only good reason to believe that his model is going to > > function as advertised is that *when* it is working we will be able > > to see that it really does work: > > was actually: > > Even Ben Goertzel, in a recent comment, said something to the effect > that the only good reason to believe that his model is going to > function as advertised, OTHER THAN THE INTUITIONS THAT HE AND OTHERS OF > LIKE MIND HAVE ABOUT THE VIABILITY OF THE DESIGN (AND INTUITIONS FALL > SHORT OF WHAT I WOULD REALLY CALL A "GOOD REASON" TO TRUST THE DESIGN) > is that *when* it is working we will be able to see that it really does > work. > > This is not equivalent to what I originaly said (which gave the > impression that you had nothing, not even intuitions, to believe in the > design. > > My apologies for the confusion. > > I should add, Ben, that this was not meant as an attack on the Novamente > design per se: I believe that all AI/AGI systems have essentially been > built on the same appeals to intuition. > > I have more to say about the general topic, but will take that up > separately. > > > > Richard Loosemore > > > > > > ----- > 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/?&; > ----- 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=8660244&id_secret=64170776-ac6bd2
