Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

use Perl Log In

Log In

[ Create a new account ]

chaoticset (2105)

chaoticset
  (email not shown publicly)
http://chaoticset.perlmonk.org/
AOL IM: chaoticset23 (Add Buddy, Send Message)
Yahoo! ID: illuminatus_foil (Add User, Send Message)

JAPH. (That's right -- I'm not Really Inexperienced any more.)

I'm not just here, I'm here [perlmonks.org], and here [javajunkies.org] too, I ramble randomly in my philosophical blog [blogspot.com] and my other blog [blogspot.com]. Soon I'll come in a convenient six-pack.

Journal of chaoticset (2105)

Thursday March 14, 2002
05:49 PM

Noodling

[ #3538 ]
I apologize for this; it's supposed to go into my blog but blogger's down, and it's sort-of related.

Once I can get the framework for an expert system built (the rule-interpreter thing) something to play around with might be the three-brain concept I found in a Larry Niven story a while back: Three independant interpreters moving across the same set of not-deterministic rules, and then a consensus of two would be required. Possible problem: In a system where lots of "right" answers could be found, a two-brain consensus could be nearly impossible to reach. Perhaps a fuzzy set of the three independant answers would be better? Or a quick game-matrix analysis of the outcomes of the suggested actions?

Here endeth the bizarre thought.

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.