On 1 August 2010 21:18, Jan Klauck <jkla...@uni-osnabrueck.de> wrote:
> Ian Parker wrote > > > McNamara's dictum seems on > > the face of it to contradict the validity of Psychology as a > > science. > > I don't think so. That in unforseen events people switch to > improvisation isn't suprising. Even an AGI, confronted with a novel > situation and lacking data and models and rules for that, has to > switch to ad-hoc heuristics. > > > Psychology, if is is a valid science can be used for modelling. > > True. And it's used for that purpose. In fact some models of > psychology are so good that the simulation's results are consistent > with what is empirically found in the real world. > > > Some of what McNamara has to say seems to me to be a little bit > > contradictory. On the one hand he espouses "*gut feeling*". On the other > > he says you should be prepared to change your mind. > > I don't see the contradiction. Changing one's mind refers to one's > assumption and conceptual framings. You always operate under uncertainty > and should be open for re-evaluation of what you believe. > > And the lower the probability of an event, the lesser are you prepared > for it and you switch to gut feelings since you lack empirical experience. > Likely that one's gut feelings operate within one's frame of mind. > > So these are two different levels. > This seems to link in with the very long running set of postings on Solomonoff (or should it be -ov -oв in Cyrillic). Laplace assigned a probability of 50% to something we knew absolutely nothing about. I feel that "*gut feelings*" are quite often wrong. Freeloading is very much believed in by the "man in the street" but it is wroong and very much oversimnplified. Could I tell you something of the background of John Prescott. He is very much a bruiser. He has a Trade Union background and has not had much education. Many such people have a sense of inverted snobbery. Alan Sugar says that he got around the World speaking only English, yet a firm that employs linguists can more than double its sales overseas. Of course as I think we all agree one of the main characteristics of AGI is its ability to understand NL. AGI will thus be polyglot. Indeed one of the main tests will be translation. "What is the difference between laying concrete at 50C and fighting Israel?". First Turing question! > > > John Prescott at the Chilcot Iraq inquiry said that the test of > > politicians was not hindsight, but courage and leadership. What the .... > > does he mean. > > Rule of thumb is that it's better to do something than to do nothing. > You act, others have to react. As long as you lead the game, you can > correct your own errors. But when you hesitate, the other parties will > move first and you eat what they hand out to you. > > And don't forget that the people still prefer alpha-males that lead, > not those that deeply think. It's more important to unite the tribe > with screams and jumps against the enemy than to reason about budgets > or rule of law--gawd how boring... :) > Yes, but an AGI system will have to balance budgets. In fact narrow AI is making a contribution in the shape of Forex. I have claimed that perhaps AGI will consist of a library of narrow AI. Forex, or rather software of the Forex type will be an integral part of AGI. Could Forex manage the European Central Bank? With modifications I think yes. AGI will have to think about the rule of law as well, otherwise it will be an intolerable and dangerous. The alpha male syndrome is something we have to get away from, if we are going to make progress of any kind. > > > It seems that "*getting things right*" is not a priority > > for politicians. > > Keeping things running is the priority. > Thins will run, sort of, even if bad decisions are taken. > > --- Now to the next posting --- > > > This is an interesting article. > > Indeed. > > > Google is certain to uncover the *real motivators.* > > Sex and power. > Are you in effect claiming that the leaders of (say) terrorist movements are motivated by power and do not have any ideology. It has been said that war is individual unselfishness combined with corporate selfishness (interesting quote to remember). I am not sure. What are the motivations of the "unselfish" foot soldiers? How do leaders obtain their power. As Mr Cameron rightly said the ISI is exporting terror. British Pakistanis though are free agents. They do not have to be "*exported"* by the ISI. Why do they allow themselves to be? They are *not* conscripts. - Ian Parker > > > > ------------------------------------------- > 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/?&; > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > ------------------------------------------- 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/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
