On 6/4/07, Tom McCabe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So there's you're problem! You're demanding a system that works, however badly. Any computer programmer can tell you that you will not get a system that works at all without doing a large percentage of the work needed to implement a system that works *well*. So you can see a model of the human brain that has a lot of the ideas of AI in place already, and go "well, it isn't fully intelligent yet, so it doesn't count" and go on ignoring the parts that we have implemented.
(...)
As it happens, I *am* a programmer. And I would gladly accept your gradualistic argument, if the Blue Brain had AI goals. But it is guided toward neuroscience... *Perhaps* insights obtained with the Blue Brain will be used in some fields of AI, but to point the Blue Brain project as it is now as an example of "simulation of human mind" sounds like a falacy of undue amplification... ----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=4007604&user_secret=7d7fb4d8
