It would also be nice if this mailing list could be operate on a bit more of > a scientific basis. I get really tired of pointing to specific references > and then being told that I have no facts or that it was solely my opinion. > > This really has to do with the culture of the community on the list, rather than the "operation" of the list per se, I'd say.
I have also often been frustrated by the lack of inclination of some list members to read the relevant literature. Admittedly, there is a lot of it to read. But on the other hand, it's not reasonable to expect folks who *have* read a certain subset of the literature, to summarize that subset in emails for individuals who haven't taken the time. Creating such summaries carefully takes a lot of effort. I agree that if more careful attention were paid to the known science related to AGI ... and to the long history of prior discussions on the issues discussed here ... this list would be a lot more useful. But, this is not a structured discussion setting -- it's an Internet discussion group, and even if I had the inclination to moderate more carefully so as to try to encourage a more carefully scientific mode of discussion, I wouldn't have the time... ben g ------------------------------------------- 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=117534816-b15a34 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
