I've always thought of it as
a feature of Arthur Koestler's somewhat poetic ontology of hierarchy.
Good to hear Koestler mentioned if not in entirely positive terms. I think
he's a v. important if pre-computational thinker. Cross his theories of
living creatures as Open Hierarchical Systems
In the case of an AI (presumably a robot) negotiating around humans I
expect that the way in which this would be done would be quite
different from the way that humans do it. In the human case the
circuitry controlling walking direction and speed is substantially the
same for two individuals
In todays KurzweilAI.net mailing list is a link to an article in which
British Telecoms futurologist is predicting conscious machines by 2015
and one brighter than people by 2020.
I think these predictions are very reasonable, and the fact that a
furturologist for a major company is making this
Holonic as used by Koestler implies at least a little something more than
hierarchical. I think he meant something I would call coherent levels of
abstraction, e.g. describing a body as a system of organs or an organ as a
system of cells, such that you can usefully do a data-hiding
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 10:48:31PM +0200, David Orban wrote:
During the Summit there was a stunning prediction, if I am not mistaken by
Peter Thiel, who said that the leading corporations on the planet will be
run by their MIS and ERP systems. There is no need for a qualitative change
for
JOSH,
I KNEW SERRES SYSTEM WAS ONLY FEED FORWARD, AND ONLY DEALS WITH CERTAIN
ASPECTS OF VISION, BUT I THINK IT HAS AMAZINGLY IMPRESSIVE PERFORMANCE FOR
SUCH A RELATIVELY SIMPLE SYSTEM, AND A LOT OF IT IS AUTOMATICALLY LEARNED.
IS IT HOLONIC?
IT DEFINITELY DOESNT JUST DIVIDE VISUAL STATE
What I find more interesting is the question of whether, if, how,
when, and in what way these systems might become self-aware.
Yes, Linas, you are right, that is a very interesting, and intriguing question.
Your examples are also very good. Should we then assume, that since it
is already the
David,
You raise an imporant issue, about the danger of backlash and the need to
plan how to prevent it, which has been discussed before on this thread.
But it is so important it should be raised again from time to time.
Edward W. Porter
Porter Associates
24 String Bridge S12
Exeter, NH 03833
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 12:51:19AM +0200, David Orban wrote:
Your examples are also very good. Should we then assume, that since it
is already the case that major industry segments and corporations are
run by software, and nobody seems to mind, that it will stay like
that?
Good question. Its
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 10:25:18AM -0400, Richard Loosemore wrote:
One way this group have tried to pursue their agenda is through an idea
due to Montague and others, in which meanings of terms are related to
something called possible worlds. They imagine infinite numbers of
possible
10 matches
Mail list logo
