From xod@sixgirls.org Tue Mar 13 20:33:24 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: xod@shiva.sixgirls.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 14 Mar 2001 04:33:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 51057 invoked from network); 14 Mar 2001 04:33:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Mar 2001 04:33:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO shiva.sixgirls.org) (206.252.141.232) by mta3 with SMTP; 14 Mar 2001 05:34:27 -0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by shiva.sixgirls.org (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2E49YN00853 for ; Tue, 13 Mar 2001 23:09:34 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 23:09:34 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: Re: [lojban] I almost caught the train In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: Invent Yourself On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Jorge Llambias wrote: > Suppose you are trying to teach an artificial intelligence program > what inferences it can make when it hears {pu pu'o}. In the absence > of further information, I would say that it is more likely that > the event did not eventually take place. You would say chances > are 50-50? I think I would have to say it's more likely that the event did occur. After all, "pu'o" MEANS that the event is likely to occur! Without further information, I think we "should" assume it really did. Safest, of course, is to assume nothing at all.