On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 2:28 PM, Jiri Jelinek wrote: > If you talk to a program about changing 3D scene and the program then > correctly answers questions about [basic] spatial relationships > between the objects then I would say it understands 3D. Of course the > program needs to work with a queriable 3D representation but it > doesn't need a "body". I mean it doesn't need to be a real-world > robot, it doesn't need to associate "self" with any particular 3D > object (real-world or simulated) and it doesn't need to be self-aware. > It just needs to be the 3D-scene-aware and the scene may contain just > a few basic 3D objects (e.g. the Shrdlu stuff). >
Surely the DARPA autonomous vehicles driving themselves around the desert and in traffic show that computers can cope quite well with a 3D environment, including other objects moving around them as well? BillK ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=111637683-c8fa51 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
