Kevin,
A belated congratulations on your phenomenal mimetic achievement
...the 2002 Loebner Prize Contest for Most Human Computer via Ella.
Your winning indicates a certain level of understanding of the
pursuit of AGI, not to mention your seriousness and commitment.
But, I guess your
Ed,
Your comments on A New Kind of Science are interesting...
And the reference to 'a new kind of science' is, in fact, to Stephan
Wolfram's most recent 'opus mangus' of over 1000 pages by the same name A
New Kind of Science.
Some of you may have seen my review of this book, which appeared
Sensitive robots taught to gauge human emotion
http://www.eet.com/story/OEG20030107S0033
NASHVILLE, Tenn. #151; Robotics designers are working with
psychologists here at Vanderbilt University to improve human-machine
interfaces by teaching robots to sense human emotions. Such
sensitive robots
At
www.santafe.edu/~shalizi/notebooks/ cellular-automata.html
Wolfram's book is reviewed as a rare blend of monster raving egomania
and utter batshit insanity ... (a phrase I would like to have
emblazoned on my gravestone, except that I don't plan on dying, and if I
do die I plan on being
Pei Wang wrote:
In my opinion, one of the most common mistakes made by people is to think AI
in terms of computability and computational complexity, using concepts like
Turing machine, algorithm, and so on. For a long argument, see
http://www.cis.temple.edu/~pwang/551-PT/Lecture/Computation.pdf.
Shane Legg wrote, responding to Pei Wang:
Perhaps where our difference is best highlighted is in the
following quote that you use:
“something can be computational at one level,
but not at another level” [Hofstadter, 1985]
To this I would say: Something can LOOK like computation
Shane,
One issue that make that version of the paper controversial is the term
computation, which actually has two senses: (1) whatever computer
does,and (2) what defined as `computation' in computability theory. In
the paper I'm using the second sense of the term. (I'm revising the paper
to
Pei:
For that level issue, one way to see it is through the concept
of virtual
machine. We all know that at a low level computer only has procedural
language and binary data, but at a high level it has
non-procedural language
(such as functional or logical languages) and decimal data.
- Original Message -
From: Shane Legg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 9:42 PM
Subject: Re: [agi] AI and computation (was: The Next Wave)
Hi Pei,
One issue that make that version of the paper controversial is the term
computation, which
Pei wrote:
Right. Again let's use NARS as a concrete example. It can answer
questions,
but if you ask the same question twice to the system at different
time, you
may get different answers. In this sense, there is no algorithm that takes
the question as input, and produces an unique
10 matches
Mail list logo
