> I agree with Wolfram that encoding heuristics was an experiment that had to be done. Negative results are super important. I'm so, so glad Lenat (and crews) tried so hard.
The problem is that Doug Lenat trying very hard is only useful as a data point if you have some faith in Doug Lenat making something that is reasonably workable work by trying very hard.
Do you have a reason for thinking so? I'm genuinely curious: lots of people have positive reminiscences about Lenat, who seems to have been likeable and smart, but on my (admittedly somewhat shallow attempts) I always keep drawing blanks when looking for anything of substance he produced or some deeper insight he had (even before Cyc).
The problem is that Doug Lenat trying very hard is only useful as a data point if you have some faith in Doug Lenat making something that is reasonably workable work by trying very hard.
Do you have a reason for thinking so? I'm genuinely curious: lots of people have positive reminiscences about Lenat, who seems to have been likeable and smart, but on my (admittedly somewhat shallow attempts) I always keep drawing blanks when looking for anything of substance he produced or some deeper insight he had (even before Cyc).