USCIIIIII CODE adds Super Vowels and Natural Logic Instructions, which are at your finger tips as well as on a wireless vocal communication; and these are as simple as punctuations we already employ but I have not decided if musical notes should be proposed along text with logic as the standard for Singing & Thinking machines - so that the full spectrum of a person voice is in as high quality as needed - because from the designer point of view, we have 6 billion users' potential, where each may have as few or as many as 3 vocal ID prints = almost 20 billion identities...

I don't find the use of telephones to be all that natural. I recently bought a new cellphone; I had to read the manual to learn to use most of its functions. What do you mean by the phone is an "honest machine"? As opposed to what, a dishonest machine? What do you mean by saying computers need "compensation"? Why do we need machines that sing? You say you posted some info on the web, but you don't say what it was or where it's posted. What are "Super Vowels" and "Natural Logic Instructions"? And what do human voice prints have to do with all this? I can understand people just fine without having to know their voice print.

The point is, your post doesn't make clear what your idea is, so there is no way for anyone to judge whether it makes sense or not.

I looked at your website about USCIIIIII CODE , but I cannot tell exactly what it is. Maybe a programming language, maybe an operating system ? While it is good to see people exploring new concepts, I must say that teaching a computer to pray baffles me.

This is not the place to answer questions, but for a computer to think and talk like we do - it must have natural logic and a natural language at the level of mathematics as an honest way to make it function without any further instructions then original ones, like it is in natural thinking and talking as well as writing - and the reason the levels must be as singing and thinking in real time is because this is the way we talk and think - and not as poorly as computers do talk or listen now after half a century since they were created... they can not do it in your or my voice and accents...Hope this helps also understand, that when we pray our communications are both meaningful and yet vocalized with our best tunes

Well, Mr. Cohen, I generally avoid ad hominem attacks, but in this case, I can't deny the truth. After finding this site, which then links to this site, I have concluded that you are a total flake. Sorry.

I am also sorry, that Dwane Anderson has no grasp on "why-yes" in truths plus facts, and can not recognize wisdom beyond his shortsighted know-how, so he may keep trying to be a champion among the 'why-not' progress kind of people who comfortably trust established historic and academic plus technologic lies plus faulty ways established, and therefore can not see truth and facts they do not understand yet, as flaky, which is the way empty people are... Well I am not an empty nor a fool jumping to conclusions without having the full picture to capture the meaningfulness of the factual truth and new ones presented as well. (Yes I employ English, not only use it or try to shine in it...)

As time progresses, people seek new ideas - yet they missed on the ones they did not see as valued - because ORIGINAL is not the same as NEW and NEW is nothing more then NEW - where Original ideas with value stay so and can increase in value and interest, as the inventor takes positive actions -respecting her/his original idea and not paying attention to people with opinions yet now wisdom!!!There are followers, but few leaders and very few WISE ONES in the IP industry. SORRY for sharing TRUTH you may not like, but better accept.

Creating machines in our own image, as we are created by creation, only makes them simpler more proficient effective intellectual servants we need to help our needs and wants.The Super Vowels as well as Natural Logic Instruction Code, are part of language as god gifted knowhow of day and night, good and bad, truth or lie and all deviations from our special blessings as living human beings sharing one and only lonely warmed by its sun and wet by its water and air living planet Earth by its miraculously seeded soil; only helping Super Natural Languages evolve from the limitations of ascii-code we now employ.

Poetry and science may not be shared within all human evolved minds, but where truth resides, no fear nor conflict exists.

The beauty of nature as well as natural languages, can be captured by any open mind and including artificially created ones.

Dwane's insults are unnecessary, but so are yours Amnon. I briefly looked at your site, and I agree with Dwane in that I'm not sure what the fundamental difference between your code and any other is.

The problem as you see it (if I can attempt to rephrase) is that code is too structured and mathematical, unlike how our brains work. So if we wish to make truly "intelligent" robots, we must make some fundamental leaps to surpass this drawback.

Assuming I have hit upon your thesis, I feel you may not be going deep enough with your idea (and I may be wrong - again I only did a cursory search). Coding, and programing languages in general are set up to run on a modern computer. The limitations you state are glaringly obvious in low level languages such as ASCII, but not so obvious in higher level languages like C++, python, java, etc...but they still exist because the compilers bring it all back to binary code made to run on a modern computer. A modern computer has a centralized processor, with a predefined set of instructions. Our brains have general areas that handle specific tasks, but damage to one does not forever (hopefully) erase the abilities typically held by that section - a different section will take over or adapt. As far as I know, there is no "instruction set" for our brains - in fact I would go so far as to say the brain's instruction set is dynamic. Moreover transfer of data in the brain is not only binary (electrical impulses), but handled chemically as well.

Thus I would say your focus perhaps should not be on the language, but the fundamental underlying structure (the hardware) running that language. This must change first before any truly meaningful change in coding can take place.

Interestingly, structuring computers like our brain were originally pursued, but lost the "race" so to speak due to the extreme complexity this caused - anyone who has designed a pipelined cpu knows this. This was simply too expensive and not scallable as equipment became faster and bigger.

There is a problem, my good colleagues, as to commenting on what one does not yet understand, and this is why Questions is the best option I employ. To explain with the limitations of a language, it limitation, there is a limiting factor which is overcome by demonstration of facts and truth.Computers, need truth and facts as well as power, to be good servants; and my teaching them about how we are created in the image of our creation, and as we think and talk, ascii and English in any programing language, are still primitive when compared with the usciiiiii where names of people and places can be pronounced as they were verbally set, and limited into TEXT.The use of Super Vowels and Natural Logic Instructions are just the tip of the knowhow machines can see as 20=20 but the trade secrets are mine, and as to the prepatent method, when the project and if the project is implemented, it will be at the lexical level and from there we shall bring it to the level I am showing at my website - where you can see diacritic and symbolic instructions which are more like TEXT then CODE but mostly, taking all languages including English from its Modern Babylonian level into the level of Super Natural Languages.A note to my original research, was that Illiteracy is caused by not being able to accept the illogical structures of languages - so we may reduce and eliminate illiteracy as well, I hope, and not just help machines understand and be able to communicate with us, and not sound like Professor Stephen W. Hawking does, only if we had his original voiceprint...

To answer LittleWats, first, thanks for the respectful sharing, from the point of merging biological brain with an electronic one; and this is why I employ electrostatic plus electromagnetic memory assistants to an Olameet Machine where the wisdom is selected/managed/processed/outputted - but first I like you to capture that I see you and others trying to connect two ropes which do not match and that I am creating the most natural shift into the realm of our understanding how we as well as animals, by natural, are able to communicate; and my CODE is actually the connection point of wisdom and knowhow we do trust as truth, fact - not fictions or fantasies, which are more fun... but I do not teach machines to have fun or lie or deviate as people will do.

May be all one`s mental skills can be stuffed inside a computer so that it will be possible to live for centuries,changing the machines only, from time to time.