> your AI reminds me of an old Czech fairy-tale where a dog and cat
> wanted to bake a really tasty cake ;-9, so they mixed all kinds of
> food they liked
> to eat and baked it.. Of course the result wasn't quite what they expected >;-).
That's not the case.
I know a lot of stuff and I carefully selected features for strong AI.
I rejected far more features than I included.
And I didn't it because I thought that these rejected features are useless in true AI, in spite that these rejected features are useful for weak AI.
> I think you should start to play with something a bit less challenging
> what would help you to see the problem with your AI.
As I said --- I'm working on limited AI. Which is simultaneously:
1) Weak AI.
2) Few steps toward strong AI.
There are many weak AI applications. Some of weak AIs are steps toward strong AI, most of weak AIs don't contribute almost anything to strong AI.
That's why I need to choose limited AI functionality carefully.
Your suggestion below may become a good example of such limited AI. With proper system structure.
But probably I wouldn't work on it in the nearest future because it doesn't have much business sense.
======= Jiri's idea =======
How about developing a story generator. User would say something like:
I want an n-pages long story about [a topic], genre [a genre].
Then you could use google etc (to save some coding) and try to
generate a story by connecting some often connected strings.
Users could provide the first sentence or two as an initial story trigger.
I do not think you would generate a regular 5 page story when using
just your statistical approach. I think it would be pretty odd
mix of strings with pointless storyline = something far from the
quality of an average man-made story.