Mark, You claimed I made a particular false statement about the Collins paper. (That by itself could have just been a misunderstanding or an honest mistake.) But then you added an insult to that by implying I had probably made the alleged error because I was incapable of understand the mathematics involved. As if that wasn't enough in the way of gratuitous insults, you suggested my alleged error called in to question the validity of the other things I have said on this list.
That is a pretty deep, purposely and unnecessarily, insulting put down.
I think I have shown that I did understood the math in question, perhaps
better than you, since you initially totally ignored the part of the paper
that supported my statement. I have shown that my statement was in fact
correct by a reasonable interpretation of my words. Thus, not only was your
accusation of my error unjustified, but also, even more so, the two insults
placed on top of it.
You have not apologized for your unjustified accusation of error and the two
additional unnecessary insults (unless your statement "Ok. I'll bite." is
considered an appropriate apology for such an improper set of deep insults).
Instead you have continued in an even more insulting tone, including
starting one subsequent email with a comment about something I had said that
went as follows:
"<HeavySarcasm>Wow. Is that what dot products
are?</HeavySarcasm>"
I don't mind people questioning me, or pointing out errors when I make them.
I even have a fair amount of tolerance for people mistakenly accusing me of
making an error, if they make the false accusation honestly and not in a
purposely insulting manner, as did you.
Why should I waste more time conversing with someone who wants to converse
in such an insulting tone?
Mark, you have been quick to publicly call other people on this list
"trolls", in effect to their face, in front of the whole list. This is a
behavior most people would consider very hurtful. So what do you call
people on this list who not only falsely accuse other people of errors, add
several unnecessary insults based on the false accusation, and then when
shown to be in error, continue addressing comments to the falsely accused
person in a "HeavySarcasm" style?
How about "mean spirited."
Mark, you are an intelligent person, and I have found some of your posts
valuable. That day a few weeks ago when you and Ben were riffing back and
forth, I was offended by your tone, but I thought many of your questions
were valuable. If you wish to continue any sort of communication with me,
feel free to question and challenge, but please lay off the "HeavySarcasm"
and insults which do nothing to further the exchange and clarification of
ideas.
With regard to your questions below, If you actually took the time to read
my prior responses, I think you will see I have substantially answered them.
Ed Porter
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Waser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 1:24 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research]
Ed,
Get a grip. Try to write with complete words in complete sentences
(unless discreted means a combination of excreted and discredited -- which
works for me :-).
I'm not coming back for a second swing. I'm still pursuing the first
one. You just aren't oriented well enough to realize it.
>> Now you are implicitly attacking me for implying it is new to think you
>> could deal with vectors in some sort of compressed representation.
Nope. First of all, compressed representation is *absolutely* the wrong
term for what you're looking for.
Second, I actually am still trying to figure out what *you* think you
ARE gushing about. (And my quest is not helped by such gems as "all though
[sic] it may not be new to you, it seems to be new to some")
Why don't you just answer my question? Do you believe that this is some
sort of huge conceptual breakthrough? For NLP (as you were initially
pushing) or just for some nice computational tricks?
I'll also note that you've severely changed the focus of this away from
the NLP that you were initially raving about as such quality work -- and
while I'll agree that kernel mapping is a very elegant tool -- Collin's work
is emphatically *not* what I would call a shining example of it (I mean,
*look* at his results -- they're terrible). Yet you were touting it because
of your 500,000 dimension fantasies and you're belief that it's good NLP
work.
So, in small words -- and not whining about an attack -- what precisely
are you saying?
-----
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=73284487-89c736<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
