Matt: Humor detection obviously requires a sophisticated language model and
knowledge of popular culture, current events, and what jokes have been told
before. Since entertainment is a big sector of the economy, an AGI needs all
human knowledge, not just knowledge that is work related.
In
Obviously you have no plans for endowing your computer with a self and a
body, that has emotions and can shake with laughter. Or tears.
Actually, many of us do. And this is why your posts are so problematical.
You invent what *we* believe and what we intend to do. And then you
criticize
Obviously you have no plans for endowing your computer with a self and a
body, that has emotions and can shake with laughter. Or tears.
Actually, many of us do. And this is why your posts are so problematical.
You invent what *we* believe and what we intend to do. And then you
criticize
That's certainly news to me.
Because you haven't been paying attention (or don't have the necessary
background or desire to recognize it). Look at the attention that's been
paid to the qualia and consciousness arguments (http://consc.net/online).
Any computer with sensors and effectors is
Your response makes my point precisely . . . .
Until you truly understand *why* IBM's top engineers believes that
autonomic is the correct term (and it's very clear to someone with enough
background and knowledge that it is), you shouldn't be attempting this
discussion. Yes, *in CURRENT
There is no computer or robot that keeps getting physically excited or
depressed by its computations. (But it would be a good idea).
you don't even realize that laptops (and many other computers -- not to
mention appliances) currently do precisely what you claim that no computer
or robot
Emotional laptops? On 2nd thoughts it's like Thomas the Tank Engine... If
s.o. hasn't done it already, there is big money here. Even bigger than you
earn, if that's humanly possible. Lenny the Laptop...? A really personal
computer. Whatddya think? Ideas? [Shh, darling, Lenny's thinking...]
--- On Wed, 9/10/08, Mike Tintner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
4.To have a sense of humour, as I more or less indicated,
you have to be
able to identify with the funny guy making the
error - and that is an
*embodied* identification. The humour that gets the
biggest, most physical
laughs and
Couldn't one use fine-grained collision detection in something like
OpenSim to feed tactile information into a neural net via a simulated
nervous system? The extent to which a simulated organism 'actually
feels' is certainly a point on a scale or a spectrum, just as it would
appear to be with
I've seen humour modelled as a form of mental dissonance, when an
expectation is defied, especially a grave one. It may arise, then, as
a higher-order recognition of bizarreness in the overall state of the
mind at that point. Humour seems to me to be somehow fundamental to
intelligence, rather
Here is an example I recall. A vine crosses your path and you think
there is a snake on your foot. Then you realize the nature of the vine
but the systemic effects of snake fear do not immediately subside. The
result is calming laughter. Perhaps, then, it's an evolved
compensation mechanism for
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 2:39 PM, Mike Tintner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Without a body, you couldn't understand the joke.
False. Would you also say that without a body, you couldn't understand
3D space ?
BTW it's kind of sad that people find it funny when others get hurt. I
wonder what are the
I think artificial humor has gotten little attention because humor (along with
art and emotion) is mostly a right-brain activity, while science, math, and
language are mostly left-brained. It should be no surprise that since most AI
researches are left-brained, their interest is in studying
[n.b. my posts are arriving in a weird order]
Jiri: MTWithout a body, you couldn't understand the joke.
False. Would you also say that without a body, you couldn't understand
3D space ?
Jiri,
You have to offer a reason why something is False :). You're saying it's
that 3D space *can* be
Matt
As I have previously written, this issue boils down as one is serious or
one is not to be taken this way a meta-order perspective)... the key
feature in humor and comedy -- the meta-message being don't take me
seriously
That is why I segregated analogical humor seperately (from routine
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 5:23 PM, Mike Tintner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You're saying it's that 3D space *can* be understood without a body?
Er, false.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SHRDLU
Jiri
---
agi
Archives:
-- Matt Mahoney, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- On Wed, 9/10/08, Rene de Visser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I propose the following
Define
_a = (output - resource_usage) / resource_usage ;
a measure of
effeciency
_b = d_a / dt; i.e. the derivative of _a with respect
:
You're saying it's that 3D space *can* be understood without a body?
Er, false.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SHRDLU
And SHRDLU can generally recognize whether any obect is in any another
object - whether a doll is in a box or lying between two walls, whether a
box is in another box,
The most plausible explanation I've heard is that humor evolved as a
social weapon for use by a group of low status individuals against a
high status individual. This explains why laughter is involuntarily
contagious, why it mostly occurs in conversation, why children like
watching Tom and Jerry
19 matches
Mail list logo
