im preparing an article about Computer Intelect versus Artificial Intelect. if you have any idea... tell them here...

Coputer Intelligence and Artificial Intelligence.... that's what CI and AI stand for, or not? :/
[addsig]

Intelect = Intelligence for me =]

What's the difference? They sound like the same thing to me. [addsig]

Artificial - pretends to be

so AI is not anctualy smart. its just dumb pretending to be smart.

CI is smart.

True CI will make the most of the abilities of computers.
It will use computer logics instead of ppl's.
CI will not base on human thinking patterns.


CI is basicaly a compiler of world
world is a thing that surrounds us, what happened and is happening.
CI will have two parts:
1. part that periodiacly recompile itself with inheriten self corruption protection
2. +compiled part
compiled part is a compiled world.
to compile world means that all data gathered will made converted to program code. english language is a part of world. each compilation will look diferent because of diferent compiler.
compiled world will be something alike to what is understanded by ourheads or alike.

Todo:
first compiler
learning engyne
thinking learning engyne'
rethinking thinking part
self corruption protection

Hmm. Artificial = pretending? Hell, a car for example is artificial ( = not made by nature) and still does not pretend to be a car. It is one... [addsig]

I have questions for you, nonama:

first compiler:
What is is going to compile? In what form is it going to be compiled to? Please try to make every effort to pursue your thoughts to understandable form before publishing them. Some people might you're just talking _____sh


learning engyne
thinking learning engyne
What's the learning engine. How does it differ from the thinking-learning engine?

rethinking thinking part
Yes, you should explain this one too.

self corruption protection:
Self-corruption protection sounds like something that might be exceptinally meaningful. What do you mean by this, exactly?

One more thing: It is very important that you read articles from people currently working on AI. It is actually possible to propose something new(_almost_) in an area you really dedicate yourself to. But you must be acquinted in the state-of-the-art of current thought in that area among the sages. Fortunately, the people that do most of the thinking tend to publish their findings online ... I will never forget www.researchindex.com/cs.

Its easier to advance from what people are already discovered. When the basic facts are known, you will know how to extend them. You will also know when they don't need to be extended but just implemented, believe me. You might also stumble on some facts that are hidden in yet-to-be-published papers ... :=]

1. What is is going to compile? In what form is it going to be compiled to?

compiler = set of rules. those set of rules are being made of information gathered.
it will make a new set of rules.
the form doesnt matter, it can be binaries, c code, hulabula lang code. or something.

2. learning engyne
the part that prepares new set of rules. just extracts interesting information from everywhere.

3. thinking learning engyne
part that writes new learning engyne. learning engyne stuff is also some set of rules.

4. What's the learning engine. How does it differ from the thinking-learning engine?
second one makes the first one.

5. rethinking thinking part
part that makes a thinking part rules. this is also made by itself. after rethinking, thinking engyne will look diferent, cuz new gathered data will be included.

6. self corruption protection
as it rethinks itself, it may leave thinking part as not needed, and stop evolving or something like that. there must be protection for that.

Hi!

Ok. Lets suppose we want to build this thing. What would we build first? What would we build next? What exactly is a small app using this CI going to look like or do?

Robots? IRC bots? Intelligent game characters? How exactly would you test the core functionality of your system?

CI vs. AI - CI, for memory, would win, because AI is more like a human, and computers can store more memory, at once than a human.
But for fellings(even thought they dont have them) AI would win, for atleast 'pretending' to have feelings.

In my opinion, `AI' is a serious misnomer. the idea of artificial intelligence suggests to me the kind of applications where computer software is written so as to appear to be making complicated judgements relying on some form of awareness of meaning. E.g. `talker bots' such as ALICE, which seem to `understand' the meaning of questions presented to it, whilst actually applying little more than a basic pattern matching routine to return one of a finite number of predefined strings.
The apparent understanding (ahem.) of such machines certainly may be described as artificial, but a more common application of the term AI is attributed to machines which truly are intelligent (but not yet to the extent of having long and meaningful conversations in a natural human language), especially those employing 'fuzzy logic' or pseudo-analogue techniques such as neural networks, genetic algorithms and support vector machines.
The distinction you seem to be making between `AI' and `CI' seems to be an unclear one; that a CI application will focus on those abilities which differentiate computers from humans: extremely rapid numerical calculations, vast ammounts of restructurable, organised memory, indefinite repetition of small simple tasks etc.
In attempting to make any like-for-like comparison between the two, it becomes clear that their applications are completely seperate. Whilst it may be possible to use a concrete logical procedure to control the traffic systems in a large city, there may be no obvious algorithm for estimating the probability that a client of a bank will default on a loan based on hundreds of variables regarding their situation.

In such applications as, for example, an expert system designed to apply taught knowledge to the manipulation of mathematical entities, and derive further laws (mathematica++?) where rigorous explanations of the steps taken in the computers reasoning is necessary, a `CI' model is the only viable solution, as reasoning takes place in discrete steps which may be documented by the application.
In many cases, however, the number of variations of a problem is so great (and liable to grow after development time), that a system that can learn by example (rather than simply being indoctrinated with definite axioms (which may not even exist in such a dynamic field as, eg, human language)) may prove trainable in immeasurably less time than a `CI' system.
Sometimes it may be desireable for a computer make an 'educated guess' which is based on experience, even if it has no trainer-certified logic to confirm it. eg a neunet email handler which observes that i generally delete mails with subject lines such as ``eliminate debt instantly! zbGHYAJY'' and flags similar mails as junk even though i have never explicitly given any such filter.

in short,
`AI' systems:
-useful where the rules involved can be broken, are unknown, or are liable to change.
-useful where a `best guess' is acceptable, or the only approach
-if any system passes the turing test, it will be a flexible (`AI') system

`CI' systems:
-`think' in ways which may be explained/traced by the program
-will not make `assumptions' about things it cannot be certain about
-useful in critical, real-time applications

I think artificial refers to the medium i.e. silicone and plastic as opposed to goey bits flesh.

Ok. That's enough.
CI bottomumes to be perfect.
It is the 'computer sam' inside your cpu.
(I mean the computers in the sci-fi films that can talk and are always correct).
That is the main problem that it bottomumes it is correct. Is that correct? Or some type of self-conflict?

Also, who says that AI can't use computer memory and speed. Also all of AI isn't ANNs.
There are ACOs, SAs, GAs, and many more. Which take use of CPU and MEMORY, and RANDOMNESS to preform OPTIMIZED SEARCHES and LERANING. CI is obsolete into AI. Sorry.

And you are also bottomuming that CI is _not_ artificial?
[addsig]

the so called CI in the post machine just made a mistake. Check the above post.
bottomumes? or a$$umes? see. the computer thinks it is perfect. [addsig]

Quote:

Also, who says that AI can't use computer memory and speed. Also all of AI isn't ANNs.
There are ACOs, SAs, GAs, and many more.



please tell me what ACO, SA, and GA mean or at least what they stand for.