Sent: Friday, 14 September 2018 5:55 AM
> To: AGI
> Subject: Re: [agi] Growing Knowledge
>
>
> On Wed, 12 Sep 2018 at 15:26, Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via AGI
> wrote:
>
> Evn with all its bureaucracy, France has not (officially) and never had a
> single head of A
A good and fair challenge. I'll just have to find my source.
From: Basile Starynkevitch
Sent: Friday, 14 September 2018 5:55 AM
To: AGI
Subject: Re: [agi] Growing Knowledge
On Wed, 12 Sep 2018 at 15:26, Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via AGI
mailt
On Wed, 12 Sep 2018 at 15:26, Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via AGI
mailto:agi@agi.topicbox.com>> wrote:
Jim
Bootstrapping a computational platform with domain knowledge
(seeding with insights), was already done a few years ago by the
ex head of AI research in France. I need
Bromer via AGI
Sent: Wednesday, 12 September 2018 10:34 PM
To: AGI
Subject: Re: [agi] Growing Knowledge
Your attempt to declare that I stated two opinions that were
"self-refuting" just because you disagreed with them is nonsense. If I
had any idea how I could help you I would try
y, or don't. Please be clear and defend your point. I would welcome
> the debate, but if you could not care to, then rather admit you are just
> trying to throw a spanner in the works of this most-useful, constructive
> discussion.
>
> Rob
> __
Agreed
Rob
From: Jim Bromer via AGI
Sent: Wednesday, 12 September 2018 9:25 PM
To: AGI
Subject: Re: [agi] Growing Knowledge
The meta discussion is tedious.
Jim Bromer
On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 3:13 PM Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via
AGI wrote:
>
&g
is most-useful, constructive
> discussion.
>
> Rob
> ____________________
> From: Jim Bromer via AGI
> Sent: Wednesday, 12 September 2018 8:21 PM
> To: AGI
> Subject: Re: [agi] Growing Knowledge
>
> How could I possibly know what you missed (without ex
spanner in the works of this most-useful, constructive discussion.
Rob
From: Jim Bromer via AGI
Sent: Wednesday, 12 September 2018 8:21 PM
To: AGI
Subject: Re: [agi] Growing Knowledge
How could I possibly know what you missed (without extensive and
tedious meta-co
__
> From: Jim Bromer via AGI
> Sent: Wednesday, 12 September 2018 4:47 PM
> To: AGI
> Subject: Re: [agi] Growing Knowledge
>
> In general, you can't actually "refute" my thinking. If I made some
> hypothesis which could be tested in an e
From: Jim Bromer via AGI
Sent: Wednesday, 12 September 2018 4:47 PM
To: AGI
Subject: Re: [agi] Growing Knowledge
In general, you can't actually "refute" my thinking. If I made some
hypothesis which could be tested in an experiment you might refute the
hypot
In general, you can't actually "refute" my thinking. If I made some
hypothesis which could be tested in an experiment you might refute the
hypothesis, but even that could be questioned. I would have to agree
that the experiment was a good test of my hypothesis or there would
have to be a consensus
2018 4:21 PM
To: AGI
Subject: Re: [agi] Growing Knowledge
That sounds interesting, please look it up if you can.
On Wed, 12 Sep 2018 at 15:26, Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via AGI
mailto:agi@agi.topicbox.com>> wrote:
Jim
Bootstrapping a computational platform with domain knowled
That sounds interesting, please look it up if you can.
On Wed, 12 Sep 2018 at 15:26, Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via AGI <
agi@agi.topicbox.com> wrote:
> Jim
>
> Bootstrapping a computational platform with domain knowledge (seeding with
> insights), was already done a few years ago by the e
Jim
Bootstrapping a computational platform with domain knowledge (seeding with
insights), was already done a few years ago by the ex head of AI research in
France. I need to find his blogs again, but apparently he had amazing results
with regards re-solving classical mathematical problems.
Our
14 matches
Mail list logo
