Hmmm. Design a combinational logic circuit that has inputs a, b, and c, and outputs not(a), not(b), and not(c) -- its function is just 3 paralleled inverters. But, while you may use as many AND and OR gates as you like, you may only use at most two NOT gates.
Josh On Monday 23 April 2007 17:43, Samantha Atkins wrote: > On Apr 23, 2007, at 2:05 PM, J. Storrs Hall, PhD. wrote: > > On Monday 23 April 2007 15:40, Lukasz Stafiniak wrote: > >> ... An AGI working with bigger numbers had better discovered binary > >> numbers. Could an AGI do it? Could it discover rational numbers? (It > >> would initially believe that irrational numbers do not exist, as > >> early > >> Pythagoreans have believed.) After having discovered the basic > >> grounding, it could be taught the more advanced things. > > > > How many people on this list have discovered anything as fundamental > > as binary > > numbers, I wonder? > > Many I would suspect. I learned math by ignoring most of what went on > in junior high and early high school classes. My school ran out of > math to teach me by my junior year. I would look up now and then from > my SF book once a week or so to see what was being taught. If it was > new I would take it, abstract it, play with the abstractions and > generally figure out what was likely to be taught the next week or > month. If I saw something new I would figure out at least one way it > could have been discovered for myself. This kept math interesting. I > very much doubt I am unique in that respect around these parts. > > > We take a lot of stuff for granted but we *learned* almost > > all of it, we didn't discover it. > > I generally got less happy when I couldn't figure out a way to derive > what was being taught. I wasn't big on memorization or applying > things I did not understand. > > > There's a lot of hubris in the notion that > > we, working from a technology base that can't build an AI with the > > common > > sense of a 5-year-old, will turn around and build a system that will > > duplicate 3000 years of the accumulated efforts of humanitiy's > > greatest > > geniuses in a year or two. > > Yay for hubris! A lot has been done throughout history by people who > didn't know any better than to assume it was possible to do what they > desired and not give up. What would it serve us to assume that > creating at least a seed AI is impossible? > > - samantha > > ----- > This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email > To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: > http://v2.listbox.com/member/?&; ----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=231415&user_secret=fabd7936
