RE: NPR, Godel, Semantic Web
So far so good. Modeling an illusion seems somewhat illusive. As is often stated, we will do the simple things first and see if they meet expectations. We can make our models complex. We don't really know how to model a human brain. We don't really know how it works. We can model observable behavior and that is the focus of the ontological systems I've had the time to research. You are right that we don't have a clue about free will. That is why we can't model it. A model is by definition, not the real thing. What we can do with HumanML is take the currently accepted observations about what is unique in human communications, model these, and see what is useful. In effect, this involves stereotyping. AI is not mystical or mysterious. Not to me, anyway. A node is a node. A property is a property. Who gets to name the names.... Len http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti. Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h -----Original Message----- From: Benjamin Franz [mailto:snowhare@n...] Apologies if what you meant to say was "We cannot _currently_ model a human's free will." - a statement with which I agree. The following is aimed at what seems a categorical denial of the _possibility_ of modeling 'free will' (something that occurs frequently in literature that wishes to deny the possibility of ever achieving 'true' AI by attempting to distinguish via questionale assertions that there is some mystical 'free will' that somehow flouts the rules of the universe and has no rules of it's own). If that is not what was meant, disregard the rest of my mail. ;) > We can only create stereotypical > human models, not model humans. Why? We can't > model a human's free will. Much about human behavior, say > emotions, remains a black box. Yes, we can > create a axioms for emotional relationships, and even > simulate dynamism through event routing, but really > we are just simulating, or building golems. There is no evidence that 'free will' cannot be perfectly modeled. It may in fact be nothing more than an illusion caused by the impossibility of modeling our *own* behavior perfectly (the machine cannot simulate itself perfectly because you fall into the infinite regression of modelling the model modelling the model modelling the model.....and hence the machine cannot predict its own actions.). A *second* machine may well be able to model the first completely (but not itself as well). The limitation is very probably in our current understanding of the human machine (and so our ability to build a precise model of it), not in a categorical 'this cannot be modeled' limitation.
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format