Ben Goertzel wrote:
Loosemore wrote:
I hear people enthusing about systems that are filled with holes that were
discovered decades ago, but still no fix. I read vague speculations and the
use of buzzwords ('Theory of Mind'!?). I see papers discussing narrow AI
projects.
I suppose there was all that at AGI-08 ... but there was also a lot
more than that ...
There was more genuine dialogue among folks with different (deeply thought)
perspectives on AGI theory and design, than I've seen in any gathering
(online or F2F) before. This is worth a lot, and I expect this sort
of interaction
to intensify over the next few years...
I'm sorry that sharing insights with others whose perspectives are
different from
your own, is so uninteresting to you, Richard. You are among the most
ardent and extreme dogmatists I have encountered in the AGI field. I think
your perspective is interesting but your degree of confidence in your
correctness and everyone else's wrongness often strikes me as irrational,
given the level of ignorance we all have about this area of study...
That was a personal insult.
You should be ashamed of yourself, if you cannot discuss the issues
without filling your comments with ad hominem abuse.
I did think about replying to the specific insults you set out above,
but in the end I have decided that it is not worth the effort to deal
with people who stoop to that level.
If you look back on everything I have written, you will notice that I
NEVER resort to personal attacks in order to win an argument. I have
defended myself against personal attacks from others, and I have
sometimes become angry at those attacks, but that is all.
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
