From: Jeffrey Epstein <jeevacation®gmail.com> To: Joi Ito < >, Joscha Bach Subject: Re: MDF Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 14:01:58 +0000 I would add the possiblity that each differentiated input has its own encrypted algorithm. and looking at it from too high an altitude provides little info about each one..i.e. optic nerve encrption different than nasal receptors . maybe even a one time code . that allows only the individual to access certain stored info. On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Joi Ito < > wrote: BTW, getting going with Joscha. He's smart. Let me know if you're interested in joining the brain threads. Begin forwarded message: > From: Joscha Bach < > Subject: Re: MDF > Date: October 21 2013 23:56:09 -0400 > To: Joi Ito > Cc: takashi ike An Gesher •, Kevin Slavin Martin Nowak •, Greg Borenstein > Hi Takashi, hi Ari, hi all, > finally I got around to look at Takashi's talks and his 2010 ACM article. The first thing that came to mind was the distinction between "neat" and "scruffy" AI, which might be described as the clash between folks that wanted to construct AI by adding function after function, vs. those that want to take a massively complex system and constrain it until it only does what it is supposed to do. > The idea of starting from massive data flows is very natural and theoretically acknowledged, even it is often practically neglected. Cognition, by and large, is an organism's attempt to massively reduce complexity, by compressing, encoding, selectively ignoring, abstracting, predicting. controlling it. Thus, it seems natural to focus on the mechanisms that handle this complexity reduction, which I think is exactly what most research in computer vision, machine learning, classification, robot control etc. is doing. A lot of the work on problem solving and learning within cognitive science even works _only_ on the highest level of abstraction, i.e. grammatical language, regular concept structures, ontologies and so on. > If