From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!dimacs.rutgers.edu!mips!swrinde!ringer!helios!SHADOW!braker Tue Nov 19 11:09:27 EST 1991
Article 1245 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!dimacs.rutgers.edu!mips!swrinde!ringer!helios!SHADOW!braker
>From: braker@SHADOW.brooks.af.mil (Jim Brakefield MSEE)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Artificial Stupidity?
Message-ID: <1991Nov8.202728.16171@helios.brooks.af.mil>
Date: 8 Nov 91 20:27:28 GMT
References: <TODD.91Nov4211052@juno.elcom.nitech.ac.jp>
Sender: news@helios.brooks.af.mil
Reply-To: braker@SHADOW.brooks.af.mil (Jim Brakefield MSEE)
Distribution: comp.ai,comp.ai.philosophy
Organization: al-oedl
Lines: 13
Nntp-Posting-Host: shadow

How about a slightly different twist:
When you under sample a signal and then do a FFT you get aliasing:
 frequencies from one part of the spectrum get mapped into another.
When you under sample knowledge and then interpret it you get
illusions: optical, auditory, and stiff expert systems.

So -- supidity is just another result of under sampling, perhaps of
experience or representation.

-- 
		symbol>>address>>signal space^3
		James C. Brakefield
		braker@shadow.brooks.af.mil


