Skip to content

Lorand Reply 7 March 2018

Lorand has the perspective and passion to warrant serious discussion.

First of all, I am not against AI, I think it’ll be useful and that it’s inevitable (though real hard work for the inventors). You know about J. C. R. Licklider : Man-Computer Symbiosis right? http://www.liquidinformation.org/index-fr.html That’s the also my perspective.

I am simply focusing on symbol manipulation since I see very, very little work being done in that field. I feel that the symbols are the ‘stuff’ of work in our field, since there has to be something to work with: http://symbolspace.info

Text is always ‘lossy’ yes, since getting something in and out of your head is always a process. Your reference to code is interesting and there are many aspects of text which I’d like to make more code-like. The notion of a ‘direct knowledge manipulation tool’ is quite provocative. Can you describe what form the knowledge takes and how it can be directly interacted with?

Your bullet points are great. Yes, we have a strong need to build ways to reduce the need for thinking, this is energy conservation and prioritising. Usually this is good, sometimes very, very bad. We need better means to see this and we need much more powerful ways to interact with our AI to help in this and other issues. I am happy to engage on this but I am not clever enough to offer anything substantial with AI.

I need to learn more about Dust please.

For the why, we agree.

Change the world? We have no real choice: yes.

Published inCorrespondanceDougDemo@50