From: Bryan Moss (bryan.moss@btinternet.com)
Date: Tue Dec 11 2001 - 19:19:37 MST
ben goertzel wrote:
> http://www.goertzel.org/realaibook/
>
> On the private e-mail list consisting of chapter authors
> for the book, we had a long discussion about the phrase
> Real AI and its plusses and minuses.
As far as I can tell you're using "real" in a dual role as
"applied" and "not-fake." For example, you contrast it with
theoretical AI research, saying, "[theoretical AI] doesn't
involve technical details regarding actually realizing
artificially intelligent software," and later say, "over time,
AI has drifted from its original focus on the creation of
real, general artificial intelligence," implying both uses.
The latter use, which was my first interpretation, is unlikely
to win you any "fake" AI researchers as friends.
> So, until you come up with a better phrase, I intend to
> keep using this one...
Is it really necessary to coin a new phrase at all? The books
subtitled could probably be used alone and the focus of the
introduction could be changed. Framing a general, applied
approach as an entirely different field (in contrast to
specific and theoretical approaches) seems like a rather
dubious endeavour to begin with; couldn't you simply introduce
the field of AI and then elaborate on the problems current
approaches have in integrating into a more general framework?
BM
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:37 MDT