CORRECTION [CLARIFYING], below.
"KP-PC" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net%remove%> wrote in message
news:BOgva.149298$ja4.7023455 at bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
| Hi again, Richard.
|| "r norman" <rsnorman_ at _comcast.net> wrote in message
| news:630rbvk4fs08tf5sjc7u4egu2benirgnc3 at 4ax.com...| | On Sat, 10 May 2003 22:05:17 GMT, "KP-PC"
| | <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net%remove%> wrote:
| | >"r norman" <rsnorman_ at _comcast.net> wrote in message
| | >news:cqqpbvgsktmgosm9sad08spq7l868a7929 at 4ax.com...| | >| On 9 May 2003 20:05:58 -0700, peer-error at excite.com (External
| | >Network
| | >| Error) wrote:
| | >|
| | >| >[...]
| | >| [...]
| | >|a system using Cobol and binary coded decimal
| | >| numbers should work as effectively as anything
| | >| else, provided the design is proper.
| | >| [...]
| | >
| | >HURRAH!
| | >
| | >It's True!
| | >
| | >Cheers, Richard, ken [K. P. Collins]
| | >
| | >[p. s. I could not post to sci.electronics.]
| | Thanks, Ken, for the kind words.
|| They were Deserved. Your comment was Cogent.
|| | OK, so Cobol might be theoretically possible.
| | I would guess, though, that a small embedded
| | system would be programmed in assembler to
| | control some specialized digital signal processor
| | -- or maybe C or C++ depending on what CPU is
| | available.
|| The specific implementation 'doesn't matter' [yet]
| because the main problem is just doing it in =any=
| way in which it can be done.
|| Most of my own work in this regard remains only
| on-paper, but I can Demonstrate how and why it
I awoke this morning Knowing that I'd been 'reckless' in the posts
that I'd made to this thread 'yesterday'. So, first I'll 'mark' [but
not really explain - I want to remain 'holding the door open'] my
It happened, with breath-taking Savagery while I was at Mass
yesterday. I saw it all immediately - Huge, 'self'-disclosing,
'unzipped-fly' stuff - and, as I always do, I immediately
instantiated a sub-task with respect to it, and just set my nervous
system Free to work toward its resolution 'in the background'. It
turned out, however, that the thing was so Huge that it
'spilled-over' into processing with respect to the other work I did
yesterday, including the stuff I posted here in b.n.
I Apologize for this - it's 'funny' - it's was only after the
global-integration that occurs during a sleeping-consciousness cycle
that I 'realized' that it had, in fact 'spilled-over' into my other
The CORRECTION is that I've not read any Literature in 'vision' since
AoK was written. [I've read only what I came across during my
'normal' [non-specifically-seeking] experience. I didn't go to the
Library with the purpose of pursuing anthing in 'vision'.]
So that Caveat has to be applied to =all= of the stuff I posted in
this thread yesterday.
The only thing with respect to which I'm Certain is that given any
neural circuitry, all I have to do is discover how it functions to
cooperate within globally-integrated TD E/I-minimization, and that
allows me to Solve the circuitry. I can do such on-the-fly [because
all that's necessary is to 'bridge' between what I've already
massively done, in the same way, with respect to the
globally-integrated neural architecture], which I'll gladly
Demonstrate, in-person. [If anyone wants to post a specific 'test'
Reference, if I can acquire a Library copy of it, I'll 'demonstrate'
here in b.n, but I'll not be able to do so Completely because my
'normal' methods require animating of diagrams [it's the way I do
Maths - very-fast, very-efficient, very-strong] - chaulkboard stuff -
which is, if not 'outlawed' in newsgroups, still 'impractical' seeing
as how my 'scanner' seems to have become 'unfriendly' in recent
'days' [and how, in long-former threads, I was strongly Admonished
against posting 'binaries' to the NG]. So in-person is best.]
Why this CORRECTION is Necessary is that, as I stated [again,
repeatedly] in the discussions I posted in this thread yesterday,
there's no way around the need for such detailed analysis - it's just
that I can do it on-the-fly.
I'm still Analyzing the 'heart'-breaking stuff. and Apologize, too,
because it's obviouxe that my 'anger' with respect to it also
'spilled-over into the stuff I posted in this thread yesterday.
It's my 'way' when I encounter Savagery - I just 'run-to-it, and meet
I always work to keep such 'separate', but but, yesterday, this
offline stuff spilled-over into my online stuff.
>From my 'heart', I Apologize to all those who I =Unjustly= Offended.
To those involved, stand-by.
K. P. Collins
| After that, implementation can be achieved in
| myriad ways, but they all remain the same-stuff
| [this's the main focus of AoK, Ap1, BTW
| [pro[b]lems having infinite-scope which confront
| nervous systems, which nevertheless, resolve
| them in practically 'real time', and the system
| architecture constraints inherent if a system is
| to be able to do such].
|| All the implementations are just 'translations' -
| various 'language-interface' stuff with respect to
| the one system architecture that works.
|| Of course, optimizing a technological approach
| by incorporating state-of-the-art hardwar[e] and
| software practice 'squeezes'-in increased
| capacity to usefully 'push-energy'.
|| But Proof-of-Concept can be achieved in any way
| that does, in fact, Prove the Concept - it can even
| be done mechanically :-]
|| Cheers, Richard, ken [K. P. Collins]