> > From: "Jones Beene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > ...Hmm... "meaning" like beauty... may exist in the mind of the > beholder, and several intelligent perspectives on this subject can > coexist while differing markedly on the meaning each assigns to > these efforts at cross-comparison.
Conceded (did I spell that right? <eg>) How did you get to be so smart in so few years? > But can you really trust anyone so obsessive as to give a word > count ;-) Judicial, if he is being paid by the word. Which reminds me, in honor of release of H2G2, I am reading "Salmon of a Doubt", a must read if you're a DNA (1952-2001) fan: http://www.phnet.fi/public/mamaa1/adams.htm > Actually this is an interesting article, but the experts differ, > and though one should be careful about siding with SciAm just > because they are SciAm, that article seems to be a decent overall > appraisal - even if it was instantly "dated" by the introduction > of the XBox. SciAm rarely gets it right. It is truly a reflection of scientific opinion and prejudices. Well named, I suppose. > In the end, once AI arrives, even if it is not "human" > intelligence - because it is a little "too perfect" and a little > too uncreative, and a little too whatever, it is my feeling that > the former nay-sayers will be amazed at how similar was the > underlying maturation process (i.e. many layers of evolved > connections and/or "software" = "learned rules" = memes). In > looking at the "manufactured way" compared to the natural way, > there is tremendous underlying similarity - even though the > materials used in the connections themselves are markedly > different. i.e. semiconductors and wires vs. potassium channels > and ionic membranes. Eloquent; however, IMO, we will not recognize the world 100, even 50 years from now. > Word count = 316 words and a few not-too-sures $3.16 enclosed. ;-)
