What did that thread indicate?

If you scroll up on your thread list, you will see the thread I
started called "Ghost of GOFAI".

The purpose of that thread was to confirm something I had been
suspicious of since I came here.

I have concluded that the behaviorists in this channel (spearheaded by
Sizemore and Welch) have a theory of the brain from the early 20th
century. And that they and their behaviorist cohorts defend its
tenets to the death.

But although they have a theory they defend so adamantly, when it
comes down to the point in which they have to demonstrate SPECIFIC,
PARTICULAR BEHAVIORAL POWERS this framework gives to a robot, they
all fall conspicuously silent.

The only response I got was a little peep from Welch, saying it
"eliminates the programmer". My challenge is basically this, if
you say that you can get a robot to do some behavior B using neural
networks, I say I can produce an algorithm that does behavior B as
well, using good old-fashioned programming. If you think you have
an exemplar B that you think fails my claim, your time to post it was
in the FORMER thread, not this one. Do not respond this post if you
have an exemplar behavior B. Instead... post it where it belongs, in
my initial challenge post, under the heading "Ghost of GOFAI".
.

Quantcast