Epstein Secrets

From: on behalf of Ben Goertzel <a' I To: Jeffrey Epstein <[email protected]> Subject: Reviews of CogBot proposal, at long last... ;-) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 05:57:16 +0000

tually the letters are about as good as one could expect to get from US academics, since they are a critical lot. At least, they are a far cry from Schank's ill-informed reaction ;-p .... I almost feel, upon reading the letters, that I did too good a job of making my approach seem mainstream (the propo

From: on behalf of Ben Goertzel <Milla>1 I Tb:[email protected]> Subject: Q2 research plans; embodied NL disambiguation Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 05:45:52 +0000 Atta

before, and we hope to do it in the next few months at least in some simple cases. See the attached PDF for some examples of what I mean. (Of course Schank would say these are "toy examples" that don't mean anything ... but the reason I think they mean something is because the work is being done within

From: Ben Goertzel To: Jeffrey Epstein <[email protected]> Subject: What I'd really like to be doing (proposal for larger OpenCog AGI Toddler project) Date: Fri,

already, plus some new young Chinese hires (lots of smart young Chinese AI guys in HK). I'm quite aware that if you show this proposal to Minsky or Schank they'll say it's doomed to fail. But, well, they're wrong.... Of course, US$3M is a lot of money. However, this would be the "Sputnik of AGI" -- i

[email protected]] From: on behalf of Ben Goertzel Sent: Sat 9/5/2009 9:38:54 PM Subject: Re: Catch-22 & videos On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 5:33 PM, Ben Goertzel wrote: > It's kind of a Catch-22, isn't it? > A: Why don't you have amazing results to show me? > • B: Because I haven't had funding to pay a te

tly eaten up by people like Minsky's proteges, who are pursuing intrinsically unworkable ideas, based on the old and unworkable ideas of Minsky and Schank and so forth The bad ideas of those AI guys from the 1970s have really had a lasting effect -- because, even now, almost the only way to get AI fund