From: Patrick Crenshaw (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Feb 03 2006 - 15:00:58 MST
That's not what I meant. I mean that you can take mathematical
statements and translate them almost directly into code, but if
understanding the kind of thing you see in math books is a problem,
you're not going to get that.
I'm bad at explaining things through text.
What do you program in?
On 2/3/06, Richard Loosemore <email@example.com> wrote:
> Patrick Crenshaw wrote:
> > The OCaML way is essentially a very mathematical way of thinking.
> > On 2/2/06, Richard Loosemore <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >> Patrick Crenshaw wrote:
> >> [snip]
> >>> Besides, I don't think anyone who thinks the OCaML way of doing things
> >>> is unnatural is going to be able to contribute to an AGI project
> >>> anyway.
> >> I've got ask...
> >> Why, exactly?
> >> Richard Loosemore
> Well, I have to say that I know a fair amount of mathematics (up to
> M.Sc. level) and I spend almost all my time thinkng about how to design
> an AGI, and almost none of that mathematics is of any relevance to what
> I do.
> Richard Loosemore
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat May 18 2013 - 04:01:00 MDT