From: Russell Wallace (russell.wallace@gmail.com)
Date: Tue Oct 25 2005 - 12:59:14 MDT
On 10/25/05, Richard Loosemore <rpwl@lightlink.com> wrote:
>
> Russell,
>
> Why did you stop your analysis there?????
What analysis? You posted nothing concrete enough to analyze, so I didn't
try. I asked you to post something concrete. If you do that, I'll be happy
to analyze it.
Why, after I asked you to take that section as a premise, so I could
> make my argument, did you stop half way through and (once again) start
> criticising the wrong thing? What you criticised, right down the bottom
> there, at the end of this post, was something so general it covered a
> vast multitude of different cognitive systems. THAT WAS WHAT IT WAS
> MEANT TO DO. It was meant to be general, so why blast it for not being
> specific enough???!!!!
What else could I do? Nothing else useful can be said about extremely
general arguments like that.
P.S. And if you have read "a big stack of Santa Fe's technical papers",
> how would you like to do us all a favor and summarize the complex
> systems argument that appears at the end of my post in your own words,
> so we can get a second perspective on it?
Didn't you read the bit where I said I don't see anything AGI-relevant in
Santa Fe's work? If I did, I'd be on it. I don't. You say you do, so by all
means go ahead and explain in specific, concrete terms what model you've
arrived at as a result.
- Russell
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Feb 21 2006 - 04:23:18 MST