Vlad, Agreed. Copycat is a lot more wild and crazy at the low level than my system would be. But my system might operate more like it at a higher more deliberative level. For example, this might be the case if I were trying to attack a difficult planning problem, such as how to write an answer to a complex question in a most convincing manner. (Of course there I would have the words on my computer screen to help me keep track of a significant part of the problem space.)
But the fact that Copycat's craziness can be relatively effectively harnessed to do what it is supposed to is an encouraging sign that the potential pitfalls of complexity can be significantly avoided I say significantly because Richard has a point, once a system gets really complex, it get increasingly more difficult to feel you truly understand it, and thus that you can truly trust it. Of course that goes for people too. Every so often one of them goes postal. Ed Porter -----Original Message----- From: Vladimir Nesov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2007 3:07 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [agi] Evidence complexity can be controlled by guiding hands On Dec 7, 2007 10:54 PM, Ed Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Vlad, > > So, as I understand you, you are basically agreeing with me. Is this > correct? > > Ed Porter I agree that high-level control allows more chaos at lower level, but I don't think that copycat-level stochastic search is necessary or even desirable. -- Vladimir Nesov mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ----- 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=73828093-9a54e5
