There is no doubt that learning new languages at an older age is much
more difficult than younger. I wonder if there are some hard
computational constraints that we must observe in order for the
learning algorithm to be tractable. Perhaps sensory / linguistic
learning should be most intense
To return to the old question of why AGI research seems so rare, Samsonovich
et al. say (
http://members.cox.net/alexei.v.samsonovich/samsonovich_workshop.pdf)
'In fact, there are several scientific communities pursuing the same or
similar goals, each unified under their own unique slogan:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 10:55 AM, YKY (Yan King Yin)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is no doubt that learning new languages at an older age is much
more difficult than younger. I wonder if there are some hard
computational constraints that we must observe in order for the
learning
On Tuesday 22 April 2008 01:22:14 pm, Richard Loosemore wrote:
The solar system, for example, is not complex: the planets move in
wonderfully predictable orbits.
http://space.newscientist.com/article/dn13757-solar-system-could-go-haywire-before-the-sun-dies.html?feedId=online-news_rss20
How
As usual, it is a matter of degree --- each of the communities Alexei
listed has some similarity with AGI in the research goals and
techniques explored, but at the same time, there are noticeable
differences in the assumptions and focuses, which are not merely a
difference in name.
Given what is
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 5:21 AM, Joshua Fox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To return to the old question of why AGI research seems so rare, Samsonovich
et al. say
(http://members.cox.net/alexei.v.samsonovich/samsonovich_workshop.pdf)
'In fact, there are several scientific communities pursuing the
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 11:29 AM, Mike Tintner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ben/Joshua:
How do you think the AI and AGI fields relate to the embodied grounded
cognition movements in cog. sci? My impression is that the majority of
people here (excluding you) still have only limited awareness of
Ben/Joshua:
How do you think the AI and AGI fields relate to the embodied grounded
cognition movements in cog. sci? My impression is that the majority of
people here (excluding you) still have only limited awareness of them -
are still operating in total totally doomed defiance of their
J Storrs Hall, PhD wrote:
On Tuesday 22 April 2008 01:22:14 pm, Richard Loosemore wrote:
The solar system, for example, is not complex: the planets move in
wonderfully predictable orbits.
On Apr 22, 2008, at 11:55 PM, YKY (Yan King Yin) wrote:
There is no doubt that learning new languages at an older age is much
more difficult than younger.
I seem to recall that recent research does not support this
assertion. Rate of language learning is essentially the same for both
Ben Goertzel wrote:
I wouldn't agree with such a strong statement. I think the grounding
of ratiocination in image-ination is characteristic of human
intelligence, and must thus be characteristic of any highly human-like
intelligent system ... but, I don't see any reason to believe it's the
ONLY
I think one can now present a convincing case why any symbolic/linguistic
approach to AGI, that is not backed by imaginative simulation, simply will
not work. For example, any attempt to build an AGI with a purely symbolic
database of knowledge mined from the Net or other texts, is doomed.
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 2:20 AM, J. Andrew Rogers
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Apr 22, 2008, at 11:55 PM, YKY (Yan King Yin) wrote:
There is no doubt that learning new languages at an older age is much
more difficult than younger.
I seem to recall that recent research does not support this
I think one can now present a convincing case why any symbolic/linguistic
approach to AGI, that is not backed by THE SECRET SAUCE, simply will
not work.
The only practical way - and the ideal way - is to decide the specific
movement, by THE SECRET SAUCE. Exactly what this
should entail is open
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 5:43 PM, Mike Tintner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[..]
And these different instantiations *have* to be fairly precise, if we are
to understand a text, or effect an instruction, successfully. The next
sentence in the text may demand that we know the rough angle of reaching
Abram,
Both to-the-point responses. One: how much, you're asking, are statements
about movement central to language? Extremely central. That's precisely why
we have this core general activity/movement language that we all share -
all those very basic movement words - we use them so often.
Richard,
In your blog you said:
- Memory. Does the mechanism use stored information about what it was
doing fifteen minutes ago, when it is making a decision about what to do
now? An hour ago? A million years ago? Whatever: if it remembers, then
it has memory.
- Development. Does
I So, please --- other people on this list help me out --- but I am quite
sure system have been built that prove the above quoted statement to be false.
Sorry, Ed, but I'm not aware of any tightly-coupled system that has all of four
of the behaviors. The closest that I can come is a website
Abram,
Just to illustrate further, here's the opening lines of today's Times sports
report on a football match.[Liverpool v Chelsea] How on earth could this be
understood without massive imaginative simulation? [Stephen?] And without
mainly imaginative memories of football matches?
John
Ed Porter wrote:
Richard,
In your blog you said:
- Memory. Does the mechanism use stored information about what it was
doing fifteen minutes ago, when it is making a decision about what to do
now? An hour ago? A million years ago? Whatever: if it remembers,
then it has memory.
-
Hi Mike,
John Arne Riise stood doubled over in his tiny corner of football hell.
These sentences are great demonstrations of why I favor a construction grammar.
It's not necessary to process the imagery from first principles. These
sentences are full of idioms that can be simply treated as
21 matches
Mail list logo
