http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Goertzel

“I like the simplified brain theory underlying the Mentifex system. It is
really pretty similar to the brain theory I put forth in From Complexity to
Creativity (and earlier, in an article published in Complexity magazine): “

http://www.goertzel.org/books/complex/ch3.html

Had I known about the Mentifex work then, I would have cited it there…. “

http://www.sl4.org/archive/0205/3836.html

Yes, Arthur, that’s the thread. It was created to highlight Steve’s disappointment with projects that make a lot of big claims but without the examples to back them up.

Everyone else: Ok, enough of this. If you aren’t interested in Arthur’s work or don’t agree with the claims he makes about what his project does, then don’t read his thread anymore. Same for anyone else’s projects. It’s not like he’s been spamming the forum with it or anything.

Carl, Dave, Helen

I agree with you all, as seen many members of this forum try to make ‘noise’ on the channels, they claim for things which I call ‘vaporware’, Things which sound spectacular but there is no scientific method nor theory behind.
As I asked for some ‘diagrams’, I was sent (on the answer) to a page that makes ‘general’ block diagrams (with bare ascii code) which are so futile and general as the general senseless discussion, I will quit trying to learn something from them, its useless. :(

I did not read the book AI4U, but the author don’t give me enough reasons to get it and try read it, if the AI he claims to have ‘discovered’ work as good as he states, it would have been a major breakthrough and the media would have sowed this a long time ago.

So let this thread rest a little, I won’t answer/ask more on this stuff (forgive me all).
For me this is an ended story, thanks for your enlightening on the subject, Carl, Steve, Helen and Dave

Who is Helen?

C R Hunt - May 17, 2011:

Who is Helen?

Sorry I may had a flaw, C R Hunt I meant! and my memory played a trick against me, and associated a internally associated most-frequent female name starting with H.. that was.. Helen (for me)
As I don’t know how my semantic associations are working, they turn out in this strange way..
Also many times I answer from the Cellphone (Android) and I cannot read all the posts due to the small screen, so I answer briefly on my poor memory-backup (Altzheimer-bugged), sorry C R Hunt! (I may edit it, but there is no way, asked Dave but no way till now!) although this was not my answer-mode I am sitting on my office now, but did not review the names.. my fault!
So you may be Helen for my buggy-memory,
BTW what is your name? C…

Awesome creativity Arthur,

Hey, I just wrote a program to print a map to strong A.I.

http://79b.org/A.I.map/

Ok, folks, I think that this has gone on long enough. I’m sure that, by now, we all get the point that some of us are somewhat skeptical about some of the claims that have been made by certain others here in the forums. That’s all well and good, but let’s try to cut down (WAY down) on the ridicule, please. This is supposed to be a place where we can all express our ideas and insights about AI (in all of it’s many forms), chatbots, or whatever related themes, without the public humiliation that seems to be abounding, of late. If you don’t believe someone’s claims, or if you disagree with them over some point, there’s a polite, civil way to express it. I strongly urge you to follow the old maxim that my mother drummed into my head for my entire childhood: “If you can’t say something nice, don’t say anything at all.”

There have been many times when someone’s posted something that I either found difficult to believe, or simply disagreed with, and often-times, I’ve had to find a “diplomatic” way to tell someone they’re “full of mini-manure”, or just bite my tongue, and say nothing at all. It can be tough, but sometimes, that’s all that can be done.

I guess what I’m trying to get at is that we all need to treat the other members of this community with the same respect and dignity that we, ourselves, would like to receive. Can we do that, people? Please?

No problem, Andy. I figured I was who you meant. (Is anyone actually named Helen anymore? I haven’t heard that name in forever…)

Thanks for the map to strong AI, 8PLA • NET.
I now claim to have solved the following problem,
just this morning while coding the JavaScript AI at
http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/AiMind.html (q.v.).

Up until today, when a Netizen was asking the AI
“who are you”, it would search backwards in time
for the most recent instance of a concept like “robot”
and mistakenly say, “I AM ROBOTS”, because it
was fetching the most recent auditory engram.
So yours truly dashed off some code to make the
AI Mind search for an instance of the desired
concept with the same num(ber) as the subject
entered as input by the human user. For the
pertinent AI Lab Notes, please see these links:

http://cyborg.blogspot.com/2011/05/may18jsai.html

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.javascript/msg/0ad8e0bceb05d291

http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/AiMind.html
has a remarkable new AI functionality—
the ability to understand “Yes” or “No”
when the human user responds tersely
to a musing question put by the AI Mind.

If you summon the JavaScript artificial
intelligence (JSAI) into your Microsoft
Internet Explorer (MSIE) Web browser
by clicking on the link above, and if
you enter some novel word like
“ducks” (make sure the word is plural!),
the AI responds “DUCKS WHAT DO DUCKS DO”.

Then enter something like “ducks play games”
with no punctuation, and the AI will ask you
something like “DO ROBOTS PLAY GAMES”.
If you now enter “yes”, the AI leaves the
proto-idea of “robots play games” intact
in memory as part of the knowledge base (KB).

If you enter “no” and negate the proposed idea,
the AI Mind keeps the proto-idea and its
associative tags intact in memory, but with
the negational concept of “NOT” attached
to the verb, and the AI may next tell you:
“ROBOTS DO NOT PLAY GAMES”.

The free AI source code involved here is
an example of “if…then…else…”, because
the new KbRetro mind-module handles
yes or no on an if-then basis, but treats
anything else, or even no answer at all,
as a failure to confirm or deny the idea
contained in the query expecting yes or no.

If you click on the check-box for Diagnostic
display mode, you will see the different
records for the three response-tracks,
that is, “yes” or “no” or “(anything) else”,
but they may not mean much to you.
The chief significance of the associative
tags displayed in Diagnostic mode is
that answering “i do not know” or making
no answer at all, causes the AI Mind
retroactively to adjust the memory engram
of the proto-idea and remove the associative
tags from the subject-noun to the verb,
so that the AI does not retain a belief
that the query-idea is confirmed knowledge.

The hard part for the mind-designer is to
predispose the AI Mind to ask these musing
questions that expect a yes-or-no answer.
As the triggers for the questions get more
refined, we may gradually have AI Minds
that thoroughly interrogate the human user
with all manner of existential questions,
as the machine intellects devour knowledge.

Cheers,

Arthur
—
http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/AiMind.html

Dear Wizards of the Chat:

http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/AiMind.html
has suddenly added a new mind-module.

http://code.google.com/p/mindforth/wiki/VisRecog
is at first a mere stub for visual recognition.

http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/mindforth.txt
is MindForth, where the code originated and
where the stub could grow into a few million
lines of code to process computer vision, but
robot vision is beyond my modest talents.

http://opencv.willowgarage.com is the
Open Computer Vision website where the
seeing robot code is already available
but not in Forth or JavaScript.

There is a tide in the affairs of men,
Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;
Omitted, all the voyage of their life
Is bound in shallows and in miseries.

Whosoever starts with OpenCV and ports into it
the Mentifex AI Mind thinking software, or who
ports OpenCV into MindForth, shall have matched
up robot Strong AI with physical embodiment.

Ah it’s good to have Arthur’s delusional babbling back. I had thought his true AI had maybe rebelled against its master.

No need for venom, Steve. What’s the problem with Arthur posting about his work within his own thread? Don’t agree with someone’s results/claims? Stay out of their thread. Easy enough.

I disagree Steve.

Arthur, although accompanied with perhaps a bit too-strong claims about true AI, I think your work is at least very interesting. It makes me look at things from a different angle, and it is great food for inspiration. The only thing you could perhaps improve are your ascii-tables, which I personally find unreadable

Mark tM - Sep 27, 2011:

[...] The only thing you could perhaps improve are your ascii-tables, which I personally find unreadable :P

Thanking CR Hunt and Mark tM for their collegial remarks,
I apologize for the crude graphics of the ASCII

http://mind.sourceforge.net/diagrams.html

and I report now that the AI Mind software in Forth and
JavaScript is going through a kind of final settlement of
the algorithmic trade-off between operating like a
“look-up table” for engrammed thoughts and employing
“spreading activation” to wander from idea to idea.

Strangely enough, the Mentifex AI project now has
three points of departure where I have brought things
to a certain point at the limits of my own resources and
where I must offer smarter minds than I am the
challenge of taking up the AI baton from me:
1) http://cyborg.blogspot.com/2011/01/aiapp.html
where Joe Appcoder could make $$$ from my AI;
2) http://code.google.com/p/mindforth/wiki/VisRecog
where a roboticist could merge the AI with vision;
3) deutsche künstliche Intelligenze (DeKi) where
people with both German-language and AI skills
may like to build upon the “DeKi” which I have
not yet launched but which I intend to create
now that MindForth can handle irregular vocab.