I already found several papers from respected researchers, and other sources, that are pointing to the validity of my ideas.

I hope I haven’t offended you. I am not questioning the validity of your ideas. I am just stating that there is no way for me to check.
The thing is this, after 60 odd years or so, there are plenty of ideas, just no implementations.

@Hunt: in another post somewhere, you mentioned something about breaking up sentences into smaller tasks?  You might be on the something there. I had always planned for this as well (with ‘and’ and all), but as it turns out, I’m starting to use this all over the place, like ‘why’ and stuff…

Jan Bogaerts - Feb 16, 2011:

@Hunt: in another post somewhere, you mentioned something about breaking up sentences into smaller tasks?  You might be on the something there. I had always planned for this as well (with ‘and’ and all), but as it turns out, I’m starting to use this all over the place, like ‘why’ and stuff…

Oh yes. Every clause and phrase is broken up into a separate “sentence.”* Even prepositional phrases refer to a sentence (with the dummy verb “to be”). Any sentence can be a “condition” of another sentence, using what I collectively call “joining words” to describe the relationship to the parent sentence. Joining words can be conjunctions, prepositions, subordinating conjunctions, etc.

Sometimes its a trick to attribute the corrent subject to dependent clauses, which cannot function independently, in order to turn them into proper sentences. This is where previous experience comes into play and the probability of multiple possibilities are ranked accordingly. Then it’s another trick to attach the “condition” to the proper parent subject. (See Victor’s infamous elephant in pajamas example.) I’m only just now writing the algorithms that will query the knowledge base in order to do this (execute knowledge it was called somewhere?).

* I use quotes because really sentences are broken down into something more like an interconnected set of parse trees. I really ought to start a thread here one of these days… I plan to use the interconnected nature of the knowledge base to help the bot glean information about how closely different subjects are related to eachother. (More than just grammar at play, but it wouldn’t be possible without good grammar rules built in!)

Hans Peter Willems - Feb 16, 2011:

I resent the idea that, because I’m formulating a thesis without (at this point) coding stuff into ‘something that does something’, means I’m trying to ‘bake air’.

I must say that, with all the bright minds here on the board, I didn’t see that one coming.

It’s not the lack of code. You say you’re mapping things out and formulating the way you want knowledge, including tacit knowledge, represented. Fair enough. I did a lot of the same when I was first trying to structure my knowledge base. But you haven’t showed any of this work. What you’ve been doing is asserting that approaches that have been clearly explained on the forum will not succeed, while asserting that a vague, half-formed idea of an approach certainly will. This won’t go far with any bright mind.

Everyone, please stop for a moment. These threads lately have taken on the tone of bickering children, and it’s already caused one member to leave the community already, and another to seriously consider leaving as well, and they are very likely to do so unless something changes, here and now.

I don’t think that many of you realize it, but a great deal of the comments you’re making are loaded with “hot-button” words or phrases. By this I mean that certain words or phrases are being used that are being construed as antagonistic in nature (whether intended so or not), and are pushing some folks’ “hot-button”, which angers them. It’s fine to disagree with someone over their (or your) views; to some extent, it’s even acceptable to argue. But the more passionate you are about something, the more important it is to examine how you express yourselves, constantly assessing whether the words you’re using are respectful, and not antagonistic, insulting or demeaning. Play the “Devil’s Advocate”, and consider how you would feel if someone else directed the words you want to use at yourself. Play the “what if” game, and if need be, alter the words to be less affronting. It’s important to make sure that you express your ideas, but try to take care that in that expression you don’t hinder the expression of others.

More importantly, if you just can’t get your point across to someone else without getting emotionally charged yourself, just drop it. Agree to disagree, and move on. There should never be dead horses here to beat, nor walls to bang one’s head on. consider that, if you’re frustrated because someone just doesn’t “get it”, it’s VERY LIKELY that this person is feeling the same about you. So just let it go, because it’s not worth the frustration and upset.

I’m not pointing my finger at any one member here. It’s not my intent to “single out”, and embarrass anyone. I want everyone to consider my words here, and ask yourselves, “is this me?” If it isn’t, then fine. If it sounds even vaguely familiar, then think about ways to improve, and try to keep in mind the idiom that my Folks pounded into my head relentlessly for all of my childhood, “If you can’t say anything nice, then don’t say anything at all”.

Ok, done preaching. Two guys walked into a bar. One had a concussion, and the other needed 5 stitches.

I’m not going to attempt to justify my language. I think I’ve expressed myself antagonistically only when antagonized. Consider the whole thing dropped as far as I’m concerned. And I’m looking forward to hearing more about all the projects members are working on. If you’re refering to Gary, Dave, then the forum has really lost out. He’s a smart guy and an interesting member of the “community” here. I hope he comes back.

Gary is, indeed, one of the members that I’ve referred to. I’ve contacted him by email, and asked him to reconsider his decision, and for now he’s just “taking a break”. Personally, I don’t want to lose anyone, since everyone here has proven, time and again, that they have valuable and important things to teach us about AI. It just breaks my heart that we can’t seem to get along lately.

I typed a lengthy reply, but then thought oh what the heck…

I’ll refrain from posting in these discussions, anyone interested in my ideas is welcome in my own dedicated topics.

Sorry, can’t let this one go

Jan Bogaerts - Feb 16, 2011:

The thing is this, after 60 odd years or so, there are plenty of ideas, just no implementations.

The thing is, after 60 odd years or so, there are plenty of implementations that have miserably failed.

Your right, I’m sorry.

Hans Peter Willems - Feb 16, 2011:

I typed a lengthy reply, but then thought oh what the heck…

I’ll refrain from posting in these discussions, anyone interested in my ideas is welcome in my own dedicated topics.

I don’t think you or anyone else should feel unwelcome in any topic posted to a public forum. (And I don’t think anyone should ever be asked not to participate.) However maybe we should all take a little of Dave’s advice and speak more positively about ideas (our own of course but also each others’ when we can) rather than focus on negativity—especially when expressing negativity in “broad strokes”. (For example, we’ve all been painting with a rather broad brush on the subject of grammar.)

Sometimes these threads can sound a bit like old movies.

“My Kung Fu Is Stronger Than Yours!” My AI is Stronger than Yours!

There are many paths to the promised land, grasshopper. I am just hoping that someone will point me to a couple of shortcuts and tell me when the bridge is out.

Implementation is always subjective and is based on the goals of the project and capabilities of the developer. Blowing out the other guy’s candle does not make yours brighter. I enjoy both understanding how something is being developed and also the rational/strategy about why something is being created in the fashion it is. I also desire “constructive” criticism.

I got your back, Merlin!

Honest, folks! I’m not trying to be critical of any specific person here. And I agree with CR that nobody should come away from any of this discussion with the feeling that they are unwelcome, or that they’re being attacked. It’s my hope that this whole affair is settling down, and that tempers are no longer flaring. We’re all intelligent, mature individuals here, who (I’m certain) have learned over our lives how to get along with others. Perhaps we’ve all just forgotten, and will now let bygones be bygones.

Sometimes these threads can sound a bit like old movies.

“My Kung Fu Is Stronger Than Yours!” My AI is Stronger than Yours!

when reading this, I got a mental image of Arthur’s Merlin with a Kung-Fu lip-sync. very very funny!