MindForth artificial intelligence lives forever.

The AI Mind in Win32Forth free online for robots at
http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/mind4th.html
has just been updated with a KB-traversal
feature that traverses the knowledge base
and keeps the AI Mind thinking endlessly.

http://mind.sourceforge.net/mind4th.html
is another source of versions of MindForth.

http://AIMind-i.com is a progeny of MindForth.

mentifex@myuw.net wrote:

> The AI Mind in Win32Forth free online for robots
> at http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/mind4th.html
> has just been updated with a KB-traversal feature
> that traverses the knowledge base and keeps the AI
> Mind thinking endlessly.

> http://mind.sourceforge.net/mind4th.html
> is another source of versions of MindForth.

> http://AIMind-i.com is a progeny of MindForth.

As a quick browse of this now long-standing review
of MindForth will confirm, Arthur T. Murray has
been flogging his claim to have "solved A.I." since
long before computers with capacities capable of
doing any such thing were available. This makes it
very appropriate that his claims are now being
crossposted to the science fiction hierarchy.

http://www.nothingisreal.com/mentifex_faq.html

Caveat emptor.

A quick Google for "MindForth" will show just
how pervasive this flogging has become.

xanthian.

In rec.arts.sf.science Kent Paul Dolan <xanthian@well.com> wrote:
> As a quick browse of this now long-standing review
> of MindForth will confirm, Arthur T. Murray has
> been flogging his claim to have "solved A.I." since
> long before computers with capacities capable of
> doing any such thing were available. This makes it
> very appropriate that his claims are now being
> crossposted to the science fiction hierarchy.

Your post seems to imply that computers have now achieved the capacity for
A.I., though presumably not the actual capability. So this makes me
curious: are you posting from the future?

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

On Sep 4, 1:26*pm, menti...@myuw.net wrote:
> The AI Mind in Win32Forth free online for robots

Free online for robots: humans pay cash.

Jim Deutch (JimboCat)
--
"If we can't be free, at least we can be cheap" - Frank Zappa

On Sep 4, 12:26*pm, menti...@myuw.net wrote:
> The AI Mind in Win32Forth free online for robots athttp://mentifex.virtualentity.com/mind4th.html
> has just been updated with a KB-traversal
> feature that traverses the knowledge base
> and keeps the AI Mind thinking endlessly.
>
> http://mind.sourceforge.net/mind4th.html
> is another source of versions of MindForth.
>
> http://AIMind-i.comis a progeny of MindForth.

I certainly cannot pass a Turing test.

On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 09:38:19 -0700 (PDT), WizWom <wizwom@gmail.com>
wrote:

>I certainly cannot pass a Turing test.

Come on, a real person wouldn't post that.

Michael Ash wrote:

> Your post seems to imply ...

The sheer number of internet participants
who convince themselves that they can read
my mind is astonishing. Just go with the
text you had, and don't add material to it
that you acquired by clairvoyance.

xanthian.

In rec.arts.sf.science Kent Paul Dolan <xanthian@well.com> wrote:
> Michael Ash wrote:
>
> > Your post seems to imply ...
>
> The sheer number of internet participants
> who convince themselves that they can read
> my mind is astonishing. Just go with the
> text you had, and don't add material to it
> that you acquired by clairvoyance.

If you can't understand what the word "seems" means, why even bother to
reply? Jerk.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

Michael Ash wrote:
> Kent Paul Dolan <xanthian@well.com> wrote:
>> Michael Ash wrote:

>>> Your post seems to imply ...

>> The sheer number of internet participants
>> who convince themselves that they can read
>> my mind is astonishing. Just go with the
>> text you had, and don't add material to it
>> that you acquired by clairvoyance.

> If you can't understand what the word "seems"
> means,

I quite well understand what your mealy-mouthed
"seems to imply" means, which is that you don't have
the required courage to make a plain statement.

> why even bother to reply?

To help you realize that putting words in the mouths
of Usenet participants, building strawmen of things
they never said and then arguing against those
strawmen rather than against what really was said,
is a highly despised behavior by nearly every sane
person participating here.

> Jerk.

Yes, you are, and you heavily reinforced that aspect
of your online reputation with this response.

In the future, think through _exactly_ how what you
write will be likely to be received by others of
whom you know next to nothing, before posting it.

http://www.well.com/user/xanthian/xanthian_who.html

xanthian.

On Usenet, your reputation is _all_ you have.

Kent Paul Dolan wrote:

> Michael Ash wrote:
> > Kent Paul Dolan <xanthian@well.com> wrote:
> >> Michael Ash wrote:
>
> >>> Your post seems to imply ...
>
> >> The sheer number of internet participants
> >> who convince themselves that they can read
> >> my mind is astonishing. Just go with the
> >> text you had, and don't add material to it
> >> that you acquired by clairvoyance.
>
> > If you can't understand what the word "seems"
> > means,
>
> I quite well understand what your mealy-mouthed
> "seems to imply" means, which is that you don't have
> the required courage to make a plain statement.
>
> > why even bother to reply?
>
> To help you realize that putting words in the mouths
> of Usenet participants, building strawmen of things
> they never said and then arguing against those
> strawmen rather than against what really was said,
> is a highly despised behavior by nearly every sane
> person participating here.

The problem with all this puffing is that your original comment _did_
contain that implication. "Murray has been flogging his claim to have
'solved A.I.' since long before computers with capacities capable of
doing any such thing were available" implies pretty clearly that such
capacities are available now, which is all that Michael said. If you
don't think it does, well, fine, but we can only read your words, not
your mind.

So why not actually address his point, rather than huff and puff? Did
you bother even reading what it was?

> > Jerk.
>
> Yes, you are, and you heavily reinforced that aspect
> of your online reputation with this response.

You sure got puffed up a lot to end with a pathetic "I know you are but
what am I?" comeback.

--
Erik Max Francis && max@alcyone.com && http://www.alcyone.com/max/
San Jose, CA, USA && 37 18 N 121 57 W && AIM, Y!M erikmaxfrancis
All the people in my neighborhood turn around and get mad and sing
-- Public Enemy