1. Re: webnet & HAL9000
On Wednesday 13 February 2002 12:41 am, Kat wrote:
> The action in the channel was not just capable of msging the coke to the
> channel. Any word defined, with methods to replace the different
> definitions in the human dictionary, should run as part of her
> "understanding" just fine, in discussions, anyhow.
>
> > > With the "wrong" command, and a big enough database, Tiggr would get
> > > into
> > > a pseudo-endless loop of genetically trying out new code never
> > > before seen.
> >
> > Is this what human intelligence does? Are you saying you need better
> > hardware? :)
>
> In a manner, it does, yes. Humans have some need or drive or desire. Tiggr
> doesn't have those reasons to pursue original actions yet. Other than some
> rules to get me news, mind the channels, etc,, normal hard-coded things,,
> like someone using a ruler on your knuckles when you don't do as you are
> told.
> Personally, i could use a better math coprocessor.
>
> > > Now, how to convince Rob to make a few expansions along the
> > > lines of the more traditional Ai languages, but inside the *much*
> > > easier to use Eu frame?
> >
> > Can you not do this, Kat? or somebody else here on the list?
>
> I can't at this time, no. Lack of money.
Kat: if you could put even that amount of "intelligence" into business
software, instead of IRC, you wouldn't lack money. And if the intelligence
of a 2-year-old is as far as you can take it, fine. Your program would be
on par with a lot of CEO's. - but with a better memory - and less likely
to have temper tantrums.:^p
Regards,
Irv
