On 12/24/07, Bryan Bishop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The entire idea of mindreading is peculiar. Haven't you ever had a > moment when you've wondered if you like somebody? When you realize that > such simple separations just don't matter and apply, that you can't > even read your own mind in that regard? The idea that everybody must > have a solid, readable opinion that must be expressed in certain > detectable characteristics, sounds like the wrong way from creativity > and intelligence.
I don't see a reason to assume that just because we can't consciously know all of our own opinions, a machine capable of making readings of our whole brain (including the areas not available for our own conscious inspection) couldn't. Nor does there necessarily need to be a "solid" opinion in order for it to be mind-reading. A machine could always return, for instance, "mixed reaction with part desire, part disgust with the desire currently dominating but only barely" as the result of its analysis. -- http://www.saunalahti.fi/~tspro1/ | http://xuenay.livejournal.com/ Organizations worth your time: http://www.singinst.org/ | http://www.crnano.org/ | http://lifeboat.com/ ----- 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=79241628-271b42
