Vladimir Nesov wrote:
On Sun, May 4, 2008 at 11:52 PM, Richard Loosemore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I saw absolutely nothing that makes me believe that a field called
"Artificial General Intelligence" even exists yet. To the extent that there
were any proposals concerning complete architectures, those proposals were
completely arbitrary, in the sense that they were plucked out of thin air
with no reasons given to indicate that they would be any different to
similar proposals plucked in like fashion 20 years ago.
People do not even have a common LANGUAGE within which they could discuss
the question of whether these papers are arbitrary pet projects of their
creators, or something deeper. Does anyone here understanding what I mean
by that?
It has to start somewhere. Increasing awareness of the problem and
rebranding the research direction is a good thing in itself. Even if
not accompanied by noticeably increased understanding initially, it
will lead to more people trying to work out AGI, which hopefully will
advance the field, even if by "non-mainstream-AGI" leaps...
Then it is just another bandwagon, like "Expert Systems", "Neural
Networks", "Embodied Systems" ......
I have had branding up to the eyeballs.
Content is what matters.
Richard Loosemore
-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription:
http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=101455710-f059c4
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
