On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 7:12 PM, Richard Loosemore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
David Clark wrote:
Richard:
I was one of the first people to help you get on the AGI list
years ago and I have appreciated many of your emails but Ben's
comments below are right on the money.
Although I don't agree with many of the technical points made by
Ed Porter, he is obviously very intelligent (as are you) and has
much interesting information and enthusiasm to bring to the
table concerning AGI. I look forward to his emails even more
than most of the other posters on this list.
I for one, very much appreciate the effort made by Ben in
writing this email and I would appreciate more information on
AGI and less chest thumping and ego in the emails.
Calling other people's ideas stupid, ridiculous etc IS the same
as calling other people the same and it hurts just as much.
David,
Several people have repeated the accusation that I am guilty of
namecalling and engaging in personal attacks that are just as
disgraceful as those that Ed Porter just delivered.
You repeat the accusation yourself when you say "Calling other
people's ideas stupid, ridiculous etc IS the same as calling other
people the same."
David, in the spirit of scientific objectivity, I just did a search
for the word "stupid" in all of the 811 messages that I have ever
posted to the AGI list.
There were 58 matches, and I just laboriously analyzed every one of
them.
Of the 58 total, 41 were completely neutral references to some
abstract thing that was 'stupid', or to phrases like 'stupidly
simple', with no bearing on anything that a person on the list said
(for example I once said "what if a stupid AI hacker were to...").
On 2 occasions I responded to Ed Porter by denying his accusations,
and the word was not used against him.
On one occasion I quoted Ed Porter saying to me "Despite your
statement to the contrary --- despite your "FURY" --- I did get your
point. Not everybody beside Richard Loosemore is stupid." This was
intented to be a mild insult directed at me, although it is kind of
confused (he meant to say "intelligent", so I suspect that this was
a Freudian slip).
On 12 occasions the word was used by someone else, and I just quoted
it. The other person was not directing the word at me.
On one occasion I used the word to refer, in the abstract, to some
people on the SL4 list who had speculated that I may have fabricated
my degree qualifications. This was NOT directed at the person I was
talking to, and it was fully justified by the estraordinary behavior
of the people involved. Here is the exact quote: "(Sorry for the
plug, but you know the kind of stupid nonsense I have had to take
from some unmentionable amateurs on these lists who attack arguments
by making libelous accusations about a person's qualifications and
credentials)".
On one occasion I deliverd an indirect insult by saying that "[The
mathematical terms] "Rings" and "Models" are appropriated terms, but
the mathematicians involved would never be so stupid as to confuse
them with the real things. Marcus Hutter and yourself are doing
precisely that." I did not intend the rudeness, it slipped out as
an accident of the way I was phrasing my thoughts, and when Ben
pointed out that this was rude, I immediately accepted the blame and
apologized with these words: "You got me bang to rights there
guv'nor: I apologize for the "s" word. Please re-read, with the
word "naive" substituted instead."
--------------------------
So it seems that when we look at the evidence for me using this one
word "stupid" to criticize other people's ideas, there was only one
occasion. And even then it was just an accident of phrasing and it
was implied, not direct. And, to top it all, I immediately
apologized for the error.
I have just done a lot of work to discover these statistics, and I
think it would be fair to say that there is not a shred of evidence
that I am in the habit of accusing anyone of being stupid, or even
that I use the word 'stupid' to describe their ideas.
What do you suppose would happen if we went and looked to see how
many times I call other people's ideas "ridiculous"?
Here you are: 31 matches. Most of them neutral comments like
"ridiculously small", except for three that were pretty mild
comments and one serious argument:
(1) "... they then produce ridiculous definitions, like Hutter's...".
(2) "I was really trying to make the point that a statement like
"The singularity WILL end the human race" is completely ridiculous."
(3) "That is just one example of how he pulls conclusions out of
thin air. The first time I read this paper I found the whole thing
too ridiculous to read after the first few times this happened."
(4) One use of 'ridiculous' to respond to a damning insult and a
slew of false criticisms from Josh Hall - he had said "I find your
argument quotidian and lacking in depth...". Although I should not
have been so offended, I was. I responded to this insult by saying
"You said things about complex systems that were, quite frankly,
ridiculous: Turing- machine equivalence, for example, has nothing to
do with this.".
So in a total of 811 posts there were only five places where I used
the word 'stupid' or the word 'ridiculous'. One was an accident
that I immediately apologized for. Two uses of 'ridiculous' were
extremely mild, not directed at the person I was talking to, and
both of them were pretty reasonable given the topic. One other use
of 'ridiculous' was completely justificable (item 2 above).
There was just one time when I used the word 'ridiculous' in a
direct and angry attack on another person's statements, and that was
after the other person had suddenly come out with a deliberate
insult.
Do you feel that this level of abusive behavior on my part justifies
your comment that "Calling other people's ideas stupid, ridiculous
etc IS the same as calling other people the same."? Bear in mind
that in the course of yesterday evening Ed Porter threw at me a
total of 14 personal insults, all of them of a type that I have
never, ever used.
Do you really, genuinely believe that when I say something like
"That is just one example of how he pulls conclusions out of thin
air. The first time I read this paper I found the whole thing too
ridiculous to read after the first few times this happened", this
behavior of mine is just as disgraceful as comments directed
straight at my face like "It is a shame your intelligence is not
freed from the childishness, and neediness, and dishonesty of your
ego", and "if you are at all concerned with honesty and truth ---
rather than personal pomposity ..."?
Richard Loosemore
P.S. If you want me to give you a copy of all the posts I have
written, so you can analyze them for other words, please contact me
off list and I will send them to you.
-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;
<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
--
Ben Goertzel, PhD
CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC
Director of Research, SIAI
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections must be first
overcome " - Dr Samuel Johnson
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*agi* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now>
<https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/> | Modify
<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>
Your Subscription [Powered by Listbox] <http://www.listbox.com>
