Re: [agi] AGI Int'l Relations
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:
Re: [agi] AGI Int'l Relations
Steve Richfield wrote: I would feel a **LOT** better if someone explained SOME scenario to eventually emerge from our current economic mess. What economic mess? http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=wb-wdictype=lstrail=falsenselm=hmet_y=ny_gdp_mktp_cdscale_y=linind_y=falserdim=countryidim=country:USAtdim=truetstart=-31561920tunit=Ytlen=48hl=endl=en Unemployment appears to be permanent and getting worse, When you pay people not to work, they are less inclined to work. -- Matt Mahoney, matmaho...@yahoo.com From: Steve Richfield steve.richfi...@gmail.com To: agi agi@v2.listbox.com Sent: Mon, August 2, 2010 11:54:25 AM Subject: Re: [agi] AGI Int'l Relations Jan I can see that I didn't state one of my points clearly enough... On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 3:04 PM, Jan Klauck jkla...@uni-osnabrueck.de wrote: My simple (and completely unacceptable) cure for this is to tax savings, to force the money back into the economy. You have either consumption or savings. The savings are put back into the economy in form of credits to those who invest the money. Our present economic problem is that those credits aren't being turned over fast enough to keep the economic engine running well. At present, with present systems in place, there is little motivation to quickly turn over one's wealth, and lots of motivation to very carefully protect it. The result is that most of the wealth of the world is just sitting there in various accounts, and is NOT being spent/invested on various business propositions to benefit the population of the world. We need to do SOMETHING to get the wealth out of the metaphorical mattresses and back into the economy. Taxation is about the only effective tool that the government hasn't already dulled beyond utility. However, taxation doesn't stand a chance without the cooperation of other countries to do the same. There seems to be enough lobbying power in the hands of those with the money to stop any such efforts, or at least to leave enough safe havens to make such efforts futile. I would feel a **LOT** better if someone explained SOME scenario to eventually emerge from our current economic mess. Unemployment appears to be permanent and getting worse, as does the research situation. All I hear are people citing stock prices and claiming that the economy is turning around, when I see little connection between stock prices and on-the-street economy. This is an IR problems of monumental proportions. What would YOU do about it? Steve agi | Archives | Modify Your Subscription --- 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=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] AGI Int'l Relations
Matt, On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Matt Mahoney matmaho...@yahoo.com wrote: Steve Richfield wrote: I would feel a **LOT** better if someone explained SOME scenario to eventually emerge from our current economic mess. What economic mess? http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=wb-wdictype=lstrail=falsenselm=hmet_y=ny_gdp_mktp_cdscale_y=linind_y=falserdim=countryidim=country:USAtdim=truetstart=-31561920tunit=Ytlen=48hl=endl=en Perhaps you failed to note the great disparity between the US and the World's performance since 2003, or that with each year, greater percentages of the GDP is going into fewer and fewer pockets. Kids starting out now don't really have a chance. http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=wb-wdimet=ny_gdp_mktp_cdtdim=truedl=enhl=enq=world+gdp#met=ny_gdp_mktp_cdidim=country:USAtdim=true Unemployment appears to be permanent and getting worse, When you pay people not to work, they are less inclined to work. That does NOT explain that there are MANY unemployed for every available job, and that many are falling off the end of their benefits with nothing to help them. This view may have been true long ago, but it is now dated and wrong. Steve --- 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=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] AGI Int'l Relations
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. 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... :) It seems that *getting things right* is not a priority for politicians. Keeping things running is the priority. --- Now to the next posting --- This is an interesting article. Indeed. Google is certain to uncover the *real motivators.* Sex and power. --- 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=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] AGI Int'l Relations
Steve Richfield wrote Have you ever taken a dispute, completely deconstructed it to determine its structure, engineered a prospective solution, and attempted to implement it? No. How can you, the participants on this forum, hope to ever bring stability That depends on your definition of stability. Progress is often triggered by instability and leads to new forms of instability. There shouldn't be too much instability in the same sense that too much stability is also bad. Similarly, I suspect that demonstrated skill in IR is a prerequisite to creating any sort of effective IR program. There actually were and are successful IR people. It's not all war and disaster out there. And BTW is IR more than just conflicts. Successful trade agreements, migration policies, scientific and technological cooperation are also in the domain of IR. And I'm not looking for an autonomous IR program but ask whether support systems are used and if yes of what sort. For example, the apparently obvious cure for global warming This is now in competition for first place on my list of your world improvement approaches with your idea of housing old men with young women in abandoned mines for breeding a long-living human species. ;) YES. Some say that my proposal for bulldozing the upwind strips of the continents is irrational, not because it won't work, but because it hasn't been experimentally proven. Once past computer simulations, the only way to prove it is to try it. My proposal is to nuke the US and China since they are the two top polluters on Earth. Some say that my proposal is irrational, not because it won't work, but because it hasn't been experimentally proven. The only way to prove it is to try it. Judge for yourself which side of this argument is irrational. Well... :) --- 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=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] AGI Int'l Relations
Jan, Ian, et al, On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 1:18 PM, Jan Klauck jkla...@uni-osnabrueck.dewrote: It seems that *getting things right* is not a priority for politicians. Keeping things running is the priority. ... and there it is in crystal clarity - how things get SO screwed up in small increments, sometimes over centuries of time. If nothing else, the Prisoner's Dilemma and Reverse Reductio ad Absurdum teach us that advanced logical methods can NOT be applied to solving real-world problems UNLESS the participants first understand the basics of the methods. In short, an AGI in a world of idiots would fare far worse, than a would an effective teacher who is familiar with advanced logical methods. Hence, the expectation of some sort of millennial effect when AGIs arrive is probably misplaced. Note the parallels between Buddhism and the Prisoner's Dilemma - as both teach to presume overall intelligence from the other side. *Idea:* Suppose the appropriate people got together and created the IR Certification Guide that explains both the basics and the various advanced logical methods. A simple on-line test could be created, that when passed produces a suitable-for-framing certificate of competence. I suspect that this tool could work better than any AGI in the absence of such a tool. On another note: How can you, the participants on this forum, hope to ever bring stability That depends on your definition of stability. Progress is often triggered by instability and leads to new forms of instability. There shouldn't be too much instability in the same sense that too much stability is also bad. I agree with these statements, but we may disagree with where they are leading. With too much stability, it is possible to drive systems into the ground SO badly that they can't recover, or take insanely long times to recover. Some past days-long power failures and our present economy are two example. Indeed, short of something really radical, there seems to be NO HOPE of ever curing the present unemployment situation. Stability seems to have destroyed future generations' expectation of life-long gainful employment. My simple (and completely unacceptable) cure for this is to tax savings, to force the money back into the economy. It would be trivial to administer, as banks could easily collect the tax, and just 1% would probably fix things. Note that the Koran has Zakat, which is a 5% tax on savings to provide for the poor. In short, it is socialism! It has worked (depending on your definition of worked) for ~1,400 years. Steve --- 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=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] AGI Int'l Relations
Steve Richfield wrote I suspect that this tool could work better than any AGI in the absence of such a tool. I see an AGI more as a support tool that collects and assesses data, creates and evaluates hypotheses, develops goals and plans how to reach them and assists people with advice. The logic stuff would already be built into all that. My simple (and completely unacceptable) cure for this is to tax savings, to force the money back into the economy. You have either consumption or savings. The savings are put back into the economy in form of credits to those who invest the money. --- 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=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] AGI Int'l Relations
This echoes my feelings too. There is one other thing too. After my last posting I realized that what I was talking about was general mathematics rather than AI or AGI. Of course Polaris is AI, very much so, but Von Neumann's nuclear war strategy was an evaluation of Minimax. Mind, once you have a mathematical formulation you can quite easily transfer this to AI. One should always approach problems rationally. McNamara's dictum seems on the face of it to contradict the validity of Psychology as a science. Psychology, if is is a valid science can be used for modelling. 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. *Probieren geht über studieren* the Vietnam war was lost.. 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. If an AGI system had taken such wrong decisions the programmers would be sued massively. It seems that *getting things right* is not a priority for politicians. Your Angela Merkel is the only scientist in high political office. The only other person who springs to mind is Bashir Assad of Syria who was an eye surgeon at Moorfield's Hospital. This is perhaps a theme that can be developed. I have already posted to the effect that AGI will spring from the Internet and that there will be one AGI governing, or at any rate advising world leaders. For reasons I have already gone into a black box AGI is not a possibility. War will thus end. In fact war between developed countries has already effectively ended. It has *not* ended terrorism or free enterprise war. However if psychology is valid there are routes we could follow. - Ian Parker On 31 July 2010 00:47, Jan Klauck jkla...@uni-osnabrueck.de wrote: Ian Parker wrote games theory It produced many studies, many strategies, but they weren't used that much in the daily business. It's used more as a general guide. And in times of crisis they preferred to rely on gut feelings. E.g., see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fog_of_War How do you cut Jerusalem? Israel cuts and the Arabs then decide on the piece they want. That is the simplest model. For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. (H. L. Mencken) SCNR. :) This brings me to where I came in. How do you deal with irrational decision making. I was hoping that social simulation would be seeking to provide answers. This does not seem to be the case. Models of limited rationality (like bounded rationality) are already used, e.g., in resource mangement land use studies, peace and conflict studies and some more. The problem with those models is to say _how_much_ irrationality there is. We can assume (and model) perfect rationality and then measure the gap. Empirically most actors aren't fully irrational or behave random, so they approach the rational assumptions. What's often more missing is that actors lack information or the means to utilize them. --- 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=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] AGI Int'l Relations
Jan, On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Jan Klauck jkla...@uni-osnabrueck.dewrote: This brings me to where I came in. How do you deal with irrational decision making. I was hoping that social simulation would be seeking to provide answers. This does not seem to be the case. Have you ever taken a dispute, completely deconstructed it to determine its structure, engineered a prospective solution, and attempted to implement it? I have. Sometimes successfully, and sometimes not so successfully. First, take a look at Nova's *Mind Over Money* episode: http://video.pbs.org/video/1479100777/ The message here isn't so much that people create unstable systems around themselves, but rather, that the (present) systems sciences predictably lead to unstable systems. Getting people to act in what may seem at the moment to be ways that are contrary to their interests is a MAJOR challenge. Indeed, much of the AGI discussion on this and other forums concerns ways of *stopping* AGIs from effectively intervening in such instabilities. How can you, the participants on this forum, hope to ever bring stability to our world when one of your own goals is to preserve the very sources of those instabilities? IMHO the underlying problem is mostly too limited of intelligence in most people. They are simply unable to comprehend the paths to the very things that they are seeking, and hence have absolutely no hope of success. You can't write a good Chess playing program unless you have first been a serious chess player. Similarly, I suspect that demonstrated skill in IR is a prerequisite to creating any sort of effective IR program. Hence, I would welcome an opportunity to play on that field, as I suspect others on this forum might welcome. This should be facilitated, and then watch to see which approaches seem to at least sometimes work, and which seem to predictably fail. Once past this, I suspect that the route to an effective IR program will become more obvious. Models of limited rationality (like bounded rationality) are already used, e.g., in resource mangement land use studies, peace and conflict studies and some more. These all seem to incorporate the very presumptions that underlie the problems at hand. For example, the apparently obvious cure for global warming is to return the upwind coastal strips to forests and move human development inland past the first mountain range. This approach should turn the great deserts green (again), provide an order of magnitude more food, and consume the CO2 from all of the air and oil still in the ground, plus lots of coal in addition. Of course no one seriously considers this, because it involves bulldozing, for example, most of the human development in America between the Pacific Ocean and the top of the Cascade Mountains. While the rewards almost certainly exceed the cost, the problem is that the corporations who own these developments would commit limitless resources to influence the best government that money can buy to stop any such project. The problem with those models is to say _how_much_ irrationality there is. YES. Some say that my proposal for bulldozing the upwind strips of the continents is irrational, not because it won't work, but because it hasn't been experimentally proven. Once past computer simulations, the only way to prove it is to try it. Judge for yourself which side of this argument is irrational. We can assume (and model) perfect rationality I don't think so! You may also question this after viewing the NOVA episode above. and then measure the gap. Empirically most actors aren't fully irrational or behave random, so they approach the rational assumptions. What's often more missing is that actors lack information or the means to utilize them. In short, they lack a lot of everything needed to make rational decisions, not the least of which are rational questions to decide. Most questions in our world contain significant content of irrational presumptions, yet people feel compelled to participate in the irrationality and decide those questions. Any (competent) AGI would REFUSE TO ANSWER, and would first redirect attention to the irrational content of the questions. Steve --- 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=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] AGI Int'l Relations
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-jacobson/google-and-cia-invest-in_b_664525.html This is an interesting article. Rather too alarmist though for my taste. This in fact shows the type of social modelling I have in mind. The only problem is that third world countries interactions are *not* on the Web. There is, of course, absolutely no chance of a Minority report. The object will to be to find the factors that turn people to terrorism, or ordinary crime for that matter. People will not be arrested, it will much more be a question of counter groups being set up, and modeate (Islamic) leaders encouraged. Still it is illustrative of the potential power in the present version of Google. In many ways a scientific approach will be better than John Prescott talking utter drivel. Perhaps the people who will ultimately be most at risk will be politicians as they exist now. Let's take another example. In WW1 the British (and French) shot a large number of soldiers for cowardice. The Germans shot only 2 and the Americans did not shoot anybody. Haig was absolutely convinced of the *freeloading* theory, which was clearly at variance with the facts as the Germans and Americans proved. People persist in working on completely the wrong theory. Google is certain to uncover the *real motivators.* * * * * * - Ian Parker* - 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/?member_id=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] AGI Int'l Relations
The only real attempt that I know of was that of Von Neumann and games theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_von_Neumann. It was in fact Von Neumann who first suggested things like Prisoner's dilemma. This *games* approach led to the MADhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction theory of nuclear war. As we shall see the theory of nuclear deterrence has a number of real holes in it. In terms of Poker, Polarishttp://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=enrlz=1G1GGLQ_ENUK247q=polaris+pokeraq=faqi=g3aql=oq=gs_rfai=, initially at any rate assumes the Von Neumann zero sum strategy when bluffing. Subsequently it observes the player's behaviour. Another interesting piece of work is on cake cuttinghttp://plus.maths.org/issue42/reviews/book1/index.htmlby Ian Stewart. The book was most interesting. The interesting thing is that Ian has been consulted for international negotiations. How do you cut Jerusalem? Israel cuts and the Arabs then decide on the piece they want. That is the simplest model. MAD has had some false assumptions. The essential assumption is that the holders of nuclear weapons are all good poker players and make rational, if amoral decisions. For this reason it discounted the existence of rogue states. No state is going to launch one or two nukes at Moscow or New York if by so doing their annihilation is assured. This brings me to where I came in. How do you deal with irrational decision making. I was hoping that social simulation would be seeking to provide answers. This does not seem to be the case. - Ian Parker On 30 July 2010 18:54, Jan Klauck jkla...@uni-osnabrueck.de wrote: (If you don't have time to read all this, scroll down to the questions.) I'm writing an article on the role of intelligent systems in the field of International Relations (IR). Why IR? Because in today's (and more so in tomorrow's) world the majority of national policies is influenced by foreign affairs--trade, migration, technology, global issues etc. (And because I got invited to write such an article for the IR community.) Link for a quick overview: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_relations The problem of foreign and domestic policy-making is to have appropriate data sources, models of the world and useful goals. Ideally both sides of the equation are brought into balance, which is difficult of course. Modern societies become more pluralistic, the world becomes more polycentric, technologies and social dynamics change faster and the overall scence becomes more complex. That's the trend. To make sense of that all policy/decision-makers have to handle this rising complexity. I know of several (academic) approaches to model IR, conflicts, macroeconomic and social processes. Only few are useful. And fewer are actually used (e.g., tax policy, economic policy). It's possible that some use even narrow AI for specific tasks. But I'm not aware of intelligent systems used by the IR community. From what I see do they rely more on studies done by analysts and news/intelligence reports. So my questions: (1) Do you know of intelligent systems for situational awareness, decision support, policy implementation and control that are used by the IR community (in whatever country)? (2) Or that are proposed to be used? (3) Do you know of any trends into this direction? Like extended C4ISR or ERP systems? (4) Do you know of intelligent systems used in the business world for strategic planning and operational control that could be used in IR? (5) Historical examples? Like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Cybersyn for the real-time control of the planned economy (6) Do you think the following statement is useful? Policy-making is a feedback loop which consists of awareness- decision-planing-action, where every part requires experience, trained cognitive abilites, high speed and precision of perception and assessment. (Background: ideal field for a supporting AGI to work in.) (6) Further comments? Thanks, Jan --- 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=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] AGI Int'l Relations
Ian Parker wrote games theory It produced many studies, many strategies, but they weren't used that much in the daily business. It's used more as a general guide. And in times of crisis they preferred to rely on gut feelings. E.g., see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fog_of_War How do you cut Jerusalem? Israel cuts and the Arabs then decide on the piece they want. That is the simplest model. For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. (H. L. Mencken) SCNR. :) This brings me to where I came in. How do you deal with irrational decision making. I was hoping that social simulation would be seeking to provide answers. This does not seem to be the case. Models of limited rationality (like bounded rationality) are already used, e.g., in resource mangement land use studies, peace and conflict studies and some more. The problem with those models is to say _how_much_ irrationality there is. We can assume (and model) perfect rationality and then measure the gap. Empirically most actors aren't fully irrational or behave random, so they approach the rational assumptions. What's often more missing is that actors lack information or the means to utilize them. --- 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=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
