--- On Fri, 12/5/08, Steve Richfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >If only people included two absolutely critical pieces of metadata in their >postings, then you and Google would be absolutely right. Unfortunately, they >do NOT ever include this metadata, and it simply cannot be gleaned from the >postings themselves. As explained before, these include: > >1. The syntax of statements of differential symptomology, in short, what >people/machines/countries who/that have a particular condition typically say >to communicate a symptom that is DIFFERENT what what people say who have a >similar symptom of something quite different. This typically requires an >EXPERIENCED human expert to code. > >2. Carefully constructed questions to elicit statements meeting criteria #1 >above.
If your program can't handle natural language with all its ambiguities, then it isn't AGI. >No one has yet proposed ANY way of "mining the Internet" to engage in useful >problem solving without these two pieces of metadata, yet supposedly smart >people continue wasting their efforts and other people's money on such folly. My AGI proposal ( http://www.mattmahoney.net/agi2.html ) uses natural language to communicate between peers. A peer is only required to understand a small subset, perhaps scanning for a few keywords and ignoring everything else. Individually, peers don't need to be very smart for the collective to achieve AGI. -- Matt Mahoney, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------- 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=120640061-aded06 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
