From: Omixochitl2002@yahoo.com   
      
   alias  wrote in   
   news:pan.2003.10.29.05.22.01.547818@removenetserver.org:   
      
   > On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 08:51:41 +0000, joss wright wrote:   
   >   
   > [snip]   
   >   
   >> i'm replying here because this ties in to my use of the "human"   
   >> metaphor for an AI.   
   >>   
   >> the metaphor which i used was, i admit, based around humans. this   
   >> doesn't, i feel, invalidate its use. the common terminology used to   
   >> refer to intelligent agent systems uses the terms "effector" for   
   >> agent routines which manipulate the agent's environment, and "sensor"   
   >> for... well, it's obvious. it's easy to extend a metaphor to an AI in   
   >> this way. it must _have_ (at least in an abstract sense) a processing   
   >> center which correlates to the brain. similarly it must have sensors   
   >> of some form (see below) which correlate to our own five senses.   
   >>   
   >   
   > i agree that for an intellegence (of any kind) to exist it must have   
   > sensors of some kind.  however i do not believe that these senses must   
   > correlate to our own.   
   >   
   > human senses are innapropriate for a entity existing in an environment   
   > completely unlike our own.   
      
   Hmm...some other animals have senses unlike our own for existing in more or   
   less the same environment (the ability to see ultraviolet light, the   
   ability to hear higher pitches than we can, use of sonar, whatever   
   electrical thing that line down the side of lots of fish does, etc.).   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)