Re: Distributed Semantics [WAS Re: [agi] Religion-free technical content]

2007-10-02 Thread Richard Loosemore
Okay, I'm going to wave the white flag and say that what we should do is all get together a few days early for the conference next March, in Memphis, and discuss all these issues in high-bandwidth mode! But one last positive thought. A response to your remark: So let's look at the mappings

RE: Distributed Semantics [WAS Re: [agi] Religion-free technical content]

2007-10-02 Thread Mark Waser
necessary for both scale-invariance and scalability - Original Message - From: "Richard Loosemore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 9:49 AM Subject: **SPAM** Distributed Semantics [WAS Re: [agi] Religion-free technical content] Mark Waser wrote:

Distributed Semantics [WAS Re: [agi] Religion-free technical content]

2007-10-02 Thread Richard Loosemore
Mark Waser wrote: Interesting. I believe that we have a fundamental disagreement. I would argue that the semantics *don't* have to be distributed. My argument/proof would be that I believe that *anything* can be described in words -- and that I believe that previous narrow AI are brittle