> On Oct 31, 3:28 pm, "Wei Dai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 4. For someone on a practical mission to write an AI that makes sensible
>> decisions, perhaps the model can serve as a starting point and as
>> illustration of how far away we still are from that goal.
> Heh.  Yes, very interesting indeed.  But a huge body of knowledge and
> a great deal of smartness is needed to even begin to grasp all that
> stuff ;)
> As regards AI I gotta wonder whether that 'Decision Theory' stuff is
> really 'the heart of the matter'  - perhaps its the wrong level of
> abstraction for the problem.  That is it say, it would be great if the
> AI could work out all the decision theory for itself, rather than
> having us trying to program it in (and probably failing miserably).
> Certainly, I'm sure as hell not smart enough to come up with a working
> model of decisions.  So, rather than trying to do the impossible,
> better to search for a higher level of abstraction.  Look for the
> answers in communication theory/ontology, rather than decision
> theory.  Decision theory would be derivative of an effective ontology
> - that saves me the bother of trying to work it out ;)

Decisions require some value structure.  To get values from an ontology you'd 
have to get around the Naturalistic fallacy.

Brent Meeker

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to