Richard, What is your specific complaint about the 'viability of the framework'?
Ed, This line of data gathering is very interesting to me as well, though I found quickly that using all web sources quickly devolved into insanity. By using scanned text novels, I was able to extract lots of relational information on a range of topics. With a well defined ontology system, and some human overview, a large amount of information can be extracted and many probabilities learned. James Ed Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >RICHARD LOOSEMORE=====> You are implicitly assuming a certain framework for solving the problem of representing knowledge ... and then all your discussion is about whether or not it is feasible to implement that framework (to overcome various issues to do with searches that have to be done within that framework). But I am not challenging the implementation issues, I am challenging the viability of the framework itself. JAMES---> What e ED PORTER=====> So what is wrong with my framework? What is wrong with a system of recording patterns, and a method for developing compositions and generalities from those patterns, in multiple hierarchical levels, and for indicating the probabilities of certain patterns given certain other pattern etc? I know it doesn't genuflect before the alter of complexity. But what is wrong with the framework other than the fact that it is at a high level and thus does not explain every little detail of how to actually make an AGI work? >RICHARD LOOSEMORE=====> These models you are talking about are trivial exercises in public relations, designed to look really impressive, and filled with hype designed to attract funding, which actually accomplish very little. Please, Ed, don't do this to me. Please don't try to imply that I need to open my mind any more. Th implication seems to be that I do not understand the issues in enough depth, and need to do some more work to understand you points. I can assure you this is not the case. ED PORTER=====> Shastri's Shruiti is a major piece of work. Although it is a highly simplified system, for its degree of simplification it is amazingly powerful. It has been very helpful to my thinking about AGI. Please give me some excuse for calling it "trivial exercise in public relations." I certainly have not published anything as important. Have you? The same for Mike Collins's parsers which, at least several years ago I was told by multiple people at MIT was considered one of the most accurate NL parsers around. Is that just a "trivial exercise in public relations"? With regard to Hecht-Nielsen's work, if it does half of what he says it does it is pretty damned impressive. It is also a work I think about often when thinking how to deal with certain AI problems. Richard if you insultingly dismiss such valid work as "trivial exercises in public relations" it sure as hell seems as if either you are quite lacking in certain important understandings -- or you have a closed mind -- or both. Ed Porter ----- 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/?&; _______________________________________ James Ratcliff - http://falazar.com Looking for something... --------------------------------- Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. ----- 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=73349390-542055
