Re: Fuzzy vs Probability

From: maru dubshinki (
Date: Sat Jan 15 2005 - 16:56:41 MST

False analogy; Hero of Alexanderia long ago proved the basic idea of a
steam engine, and then on to regular steam engines, and the gearing
system to turn already invented wheels was already extant when cars were
invented. Or assembled. So all the pieces were already proven from
other things. That is not the case with AI. We have no bunch of
disconnected portions of intelligence which only need to be hooked up
and tweaked. We can only copy the biological brain, and THEN tweak,
succeed, and then we can work on optimizing and rationalizing. Which is
my point- develop and invent AGI on the basis of the current proven one.

BTW: ever hear of the 'horseless carriage'? A car is just a horse-cart
with an engine instead of a horse. Horsepower, man.
David Clark wrote:
> Does this mean that the people who said the only proven personal
> transportation was the horse (just before cars were invented) and therefore
> a car must be designed in terms of a horse?
> The same argument can be given for the airplane and birds etc.
> To look for solutions from biology when the substrate actually creating the
> AI is silicon makes as much sense as designing a car to resemble a horse!
> Is this the *very sensible reason* why we should include all the human
> design mistakes in an AI?
> -- David Clark

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:50 MDT