From: Ben Goertzel (email@example.com)
Date: Mon Aug 26 2002 - 08:40:38 MDT
I agree, Cliff.
In fact I think human progress in abstract domains would be a lot faster if
we were able to do this kind of Psynese-ish information transmission just
for declarative knowledge (let alone thought-procedures!).
I suppose that for uploaded humans, even those retaining their essential
humanity, a Psynese approximation will be achievable via appropriate
> To connect to an earlier point, *this* is where I can see the benefits
> of a Psynese type inter-AI language. In fact, it offers lessons for
> human language.
> In "disputes" like this -- essentially semantic ones -- I always try
> to defuse first the language issues, so that actual differences of
> opinion can be crystallized out.
> This requires reducing an example such as bird/instinct to "just
> the facts, ma'am", then agreeing on *some* sort of descriptive
> language (*whose* preferred language does not matter -- you can
> choose or invent some nonsense words).
> At that point, you can discuss things further without language
> differences becoming a barrier.
> In inter-Novamente communication, if Novamente and Psynese evolve/are
> designed correctly ("Rationally" for certain audience members here --
> I'm not overly attached to the terminology), the issue would not even
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:40 MDT