[agi] Inching closer on the Singularity Clock.
Greeting to all Singularitarians. The Singularity, an event brought to you free-of-charge and open-source by Project Mentifex (mindmaker) has today updated the free open-source AI Mind in JavaScript for Microsoft Internet Explorer at http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/AiMind.html where the input box now invites users to Enter subject + verb + object; query knowledge base with subject + verb + [ENTER]. and the Tutorial display mode shows you what the AI Mind is thinking. http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/mindforth.txt was updated in similar fashion yesterday, but MindForth can not be run by clicking on a single link (as AiMind.html can), so here is a sample interaction with MindForth: First we type in five statements. tom writes jokes ben writes books jerry writes rants ben writes articles will writes poems We then query the AI in Tutorial mode with the input ben writes [ENTER] and the AI Mind shows us how it thinks about the query: VerbAct calls SpreadAct with activation 80 for Psi #0 VerbAct calls SpreadAct with activation 76 for Psi #117 POEMS VerbAct calls SpreadAct with activation 76 for Psi #117 POEMS VerbAct calls SpreadAct with activation 80 for Psi #113 BOOKS VerbAct calls SpreadAct with activation 80 for Psi #58 BE VerbAct calls SpreadAct with activation 76 for Psi #115 RANTS VerbAct calls SpreadAct with activation 76 for Psi #115 RANTS VerbAct calls SpreadAct with activation 80 for Psi #113 BOOKS VerbAct calls SpreadAct with activation 80 for Psi #113 BOOKS VerbAct calls SpreadAct with activation 76 for Psi #111 JOKES VerbAct calls SpreadAct with activation 76 for Psi #111 JOKES Robot: BEN WRITES BOOKS The AI selects a valid answer to the query by combining the activation on BEN and WRITES so as to spread a _cumulative_ activation to the word BOOKS. Other potential answers are not sufficiently activated, because they are from other subjects of WRITE. In Singularity solidarity, Arthur -- http://AiMind-i.com http://cyborg.blogspot.com http://code.google.com/p/mindforth http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/AiMind.html --- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/8660244-d750797a Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
[agi] MindForth Programming Journal (MFPJ) 2010 September 24
Fri.24.SEP.2010 -- Clamping Down on Stray Activations
Yesterday we made sure to upload our 21sep10A.F MindForth AI
code so that we could start fresh today with 24sep10A.F code.
In the previous code we made some progress in the answering
of what are you queries, but we noticed that the AI was not
responding properly to what am i queries. There is probably
some very simple hang-up in one of the pertinent mind-modules,
so today we would like hunt down the offending bug.
Aw, gee, the AI is actually losing track of the predicate
nominatives that go with the I self-concept and the you
concept of the non-self other. In the case of MindForth AI,
the relationships between the I concept and a predicate
nominative (such as the very name Andru by which the AI
is known), are external to the I concept itself and are
imminent in the assertions made about self and in the
self-knowledge of the AI. We count on the associative
mechanisms of the AI to keep the identity relationships
straight. Accordingly we need to troubleshoot the associative
mechanisms.
We may have to start getting away from the idea that the
final concept mentioned in an output sentence should retain
a high activation. If we want the AI to be able to answer
abrupt queries, such as What are you? followed immediately
by What am I?, we may want to psi-damp the final concept
in each utterance so as to prevent interference with the
generation of a new thought.
We were typing in you are software and getting as a reply,
SOFTWARE IS A SOFTWARE. When we typed in what am i,
we still got SOFTWARE IS A SOFTWARE, because the
56=YOU concept was not high enough in activation to start
a new sentence. So we went into the ReActivate module and
we added some code to enhance the 56=YOU concept.
I 0 psi{ @ 50 = IF \ emphasize I; 23sep2010
32 I 1 psi{ ! \ arbitrary from AI coder; 23sep2010
THEN \ test; 23sep2010
I 0 psi{ @ 56 = IF \ emphasize YOU; 24sep2010
32 I 1 psi{ ! \ arbitrary from AI coder; 24sep2010
THEN \ test; 24sep2010
However, we then got YOU ARE A SOFTWARE as a reply,
apparently because the you are magic tidbit in the KB
could not override the residual activation on SOFTWARE.
We obtained at least a partial solution by psi-damping
the old subject-psi SOFTWARE at the start of the
NounPhrase module by inserting the following code.
subjpsi @ urpsi ! \ test; 24sep2010
CR . NPhr. calls PsiDamp for urpsi urpsi @ . \ 24sep2010
PsiDamp ( for sake of SubConscious 26nov2009 )
0 urpsi ! \ reset for safety; 24sep2010
We had noticed that the subjpsi SOFWARE from the previous
sentence was still the subject-psi at the start of a new sentence,
so it seemed convenient to psi-damp the old subject as a way
of keeping it from interfering in a new thought. It worked,
and we obtained the following initial conversation.
Transcript of AI Mind interview at
6 1 12 o'clock on 24 September 2010.
Human: you are software
Robot: SOFTWARE IS A SOFTWARE
Human: what am i
Robot: YOU ARE MAGIC
Further attempts at conversation did not work perfectly
well, but we could tell that we were on the right track,
because the concepts that we were looking for were tending
to surface eventually, even if other concepts interfered
for a brief period. We are making progress.
---
AGI
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/8660244-d750797a
Modify Your Subscription:
https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
[agi] Mother of all Singularities
MindForth Programming Journal (MFPJ) Wed.22.SEP.2010 -- Solving the Missing seq Yesterday we solved the problem of the missing seq tags rather quickly, when we noticed that each time point with a missing seq was just outside the search-range of ten time-points as specified in the InStantiate mind-module. When we increased the search-range by one time-point, from ten to eleven as seen in the code below, the problem disappeared. lackseq @ 1 = IF \ if set one loop ago \ t @ 10 - t @ 4 - DO \ go back about ten engrams \ t @ 11 - t @ 4 - DO \ go further back; 21sep2010 t @ 12 - t @ 4 - DO \ go further back; 21sep2010 We added one more time-point to the search-range for the sake of safety. We realize that we may eventually need to declare something like a limitless search-range, which should serve quite well, since the search is abandoned after the first successful hit. 3 Wed.22.SEP.2010 -- Mother of all Singularities Yesterday's missing-seq bug was not showing up in the behavior of the AI, but its very presence was alarming and unsettling to us Singularitarian AI coders. Now we turn our relieved attention to the new bug du jour, the problem which we have already Web-published on 20 September 2010 by posting the following exchange. Human: you are software Robot: SOFTWARE ARE THE SOFTWARE The response of the robot AI is in violation of our long-standing mandate that the introduction of a previously unknown noun should cause the AI to ask a WhatIs question about the new concept. Apparently the conceptual activations are so out of whack that the WhatIs module is not being triggered by the input of the noun software above. We merely note this problem in passing on to a more serious problem, the fact that the word SOFTWARE is undergoing unwarranted neural inhibition during the clumsy AI response. We will ignore but not fail to notice the wrong be-verb form. As we troubleshoot the weak but world's most powerful AI Mind, we have eleven windows open on our screen so that we may call up a wide range of helpful files while we are coding off-line -- not currently connected to the 'Net. The first window is our current MFPJ page, which we are composing by typing into the second window. Window seven is a text file of our penultimate AI source code, in which we may examine the whole MindForth AI program as it stood in its most recent release to the Web, while we alternate among running Win32Forth in a twelfth window for MS-DOS, viewing the output in a thirteenth window, and now and then editing the newest source code in a fourteenth window. La forza del destino has placed on our non-Atlantic shoulders the task of coding the mother of all Singularities with extreme caution and with due diligence. Until it turns out that the Daughters of the American Revolution have been coding in secret a colossal Forbin-esque AI that will swamp all our puny efforts, we operate on the assumption that the future of AI evolution will not be in safe hands until so many AI labs are at work that we can no longer single-handedly ruin the AI emergence by taking a wrong turn into a blind AI alley. Therefore we now inspect the code in window seven and we look for a reason why our recently published output is unwarrantedly being subjected to neural inhibition. -- http://robots.net/person/AI4U/diary/45.html --- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/8660244-d750797a Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
[agi] Technological Singularity -- a work in progress
MindForth Programming Journal (MFPJ) Tues.21.SEP.2010 -- (work in progress) We are now in a strange situation as AI Mind coders. We have created an extremely powerful AI Mind at http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/mindforth.txt but we have been so relentlessly in pursuit of basic AI functionality, that many facets of our AI creation remain totally unexplored. Our most recent achievement -- yesterday -- was KB-exhaustive searches of the AI Mind through input queries put to the knowledge base (KB) of the emerging artificial person. The MindForth AI can now discuss its own existence with human users, who may tell the AI about itself and question the AI about its own self-knowledge. The AI Forthmind still exhibits quirky behaviour, but we have the opportunity now to track down each instance of quirkiness and to fix it on the most fundamental level. Simply put, the conceptual activations are out of whack. While the AI exhaustively searches its knowledge base (KB) for answers to questions, stray activations build up on peripheral concepts (not involved in the discussion) until suddenly the accumulating activations override the valid chain of thought and engender a mental aberration, a statement of nonsense. Let us try to solve one particular bug that looks serious. As we ask the newly KB-exhaustive AI What are you? and it answers with I am (this) and I am (that), we notice that, at some point, the verb AM in the responses starts to have zero (0) as its seq tag instead of the psi concept number for the noun at the end of the I am... idea. Such a situation is True-AI intolerable, because every thought of the AI needs to lay down associative tracks for future retrieval and re-assertion of the same idea in its current formulation. -- http://robots.net/person/AI4U/diary/45.html --- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/8660244-d750797a Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
[agi] MindForth Programming Journal (MFPJ) 2010 September 13
Mon.13.SEP.2010 -- Inhibition Revisited We need to go into the MindForth free AI source code and start removing inhibition code from verbs of being, because in clarifying our rules of activation, we have concluded that predicate nominatives should endure inhibition, but not the be-verbs that link to them. Tues.14.SEP.2010 -- Code, Test, Debug In our coding yesterday we switched many times back and forth between debug and test, debug and test. We were aided by our initial search for, and culling out, of current instances of neural inhibition implemented in the NounPhrase, BeVerb, VerbPhrase and EnCog mind-modules. Having formulated yesterday two rules -- that inhibition should occur in pairs, and that reasons for query-response variance should drive inhibition -- we are able now to focus more carefully now on where and why neural inhibition should occur in our open source code for artificial intelligence (AI). In the light of the new rules, we comment out the inhibition code in the EnCog thinking module, because we fear that it may interfere with our troubleshooting. Then we fire up the AI and we put the same question to the AI seven times, with the following results. Human: what are you Robot: I AM ANDRU Human: what are you Robot: I AM ME Human: what are you Robot: I AM ME Human: what are you Robot: I AM ME Human: what are you Robot: I AM ME Human: what are you Robot: I AM ME Human: what are you Robot: I AM ANDRU We interpret the above exchange as showing that the response-idea I AM ANDRU was initially inhibited as a pair of two identical thoughts, one in the innate knowledge of the EnBoot English bootstrap, and one in the response made by the AI when asked, What are you? The inhibiition on the predicate nominative ANDRU lasts so long, that the I AM ANDRU KB-response is suppressed during five subsequent queries, until finally the inhibition of ANDRU has worn off and the AI can once again answer, I AM ANDRU. It is up to the mind-designer and/or AI coder to decide how severely to inhibit ideas in the AI, under considerations such as just how much mind-control do we wish to engage in; what is the proper trade-off between time-duration of inhibited concepts and exhaustive KB-search; and so forth. Right now we are eager to have inhibition strong enough to aid our code-test-debug cycle, and we especially want to verify that each instance of inhibition is happening on the horns of an idea pair (old and new), so that no stray inhibitions are ruining a chain of AI thought. Uh-oh. We've got some good results. Let's upload the code. http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/mindforth.txt Meanwhile, here is what happened. In our hovering, looming quest for self-referential thought, we were testing the AI not only by asking what are you but by first telling the AI you are a program. Then we were getting garbage out in response to our what are you queries. But instead of dealing with the central issue (properly implementing inhibition), we tried removing the annoyance of seeing I ARE ME and PROGRAM ARES ME as some actual responses that the AI has issued today. So we went into the VerbPhrase module and inserted the following code. motjuste @ 58 = IF BeVerb EXIT THEN \ BE; 14sep2010 motjuste @ 57 = IF BeVerb EXIT THEN \ AM; 14sep2010 motjuste @ 66 = IF BeVerb EXIT THEN \ IS; 14sep2010 motjuste @ 67 = IF BeVerb EXIT THEN \ ARE; 14sep2010 The above code forces the AI to treat AM IS ARE not as normal, regular verb-forms, but instead to let the BeVerb module enforce strict rules for the usage of forms of the BE verb. Immediately we obtained the following dialog which still has its problems but is on track. Transcript of AI Mind interview at 6 31 38 o'clock on 14 September 2010. Human: you are a program Robot: PROGRAM IS PROGRAM Human: what are you Robot: PROGRAM Human: what are you Robot: I AM PROGRAM Further inspection of the activation-levels indicates that inhibition does not kick in until the AI states the idea, I AM PROGRAM, leaving out the article A because the EnArticle module is not being called. It is an eerie feeling to see the above results, as if the AI Mind is awakening before our very eyes. --- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/8660244-d750797a Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
[agi] Attn: Ben Goertzel -- SINGULARITY ALERT!!!
Hey, Ben. Arthur here. Remember the prediction of the 2012 Singularity? Well, guess what happened. I just had the following conversation with my http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/mindforth.txt AI: Human: boys make cars Robot: CARS WHAT ARE CARS Human: boys make guns Robot: GUNS WHAT ARE GUNS Human: boys Robot: THE BOYS MAKE THE CARS Human: boys Robot: THE BOYS MAKE THE GUNS Chief AGI guru Dr. Goertzel! The above is not a cherry-picked, post-mucho experimentation routine test result put out for PR purposes. It just happened during hard-core AI coding. Now, before everybody jumps in and snipes, Aw, there's that crackpot Mentifex again, let me explain the significance of the I/O. I have been coding MindForth AI for twelve years, since 1998 and maybe even earlier. Today on Mon.6.SEP.2010 for the first time I introduced quasi-neuronal inhibition into the free open-source AI source code. Why? A year ago, around August or September of 2009, you and I had our set-to (rumble?) concerning the AGI Roadmap and my posts there which were deleted (rolled back) by Itamar Arel. No biggy. I did not fix Itamar's wagon last Halloween, so I won't fix it this Halloween, either. You see, I was maintaining my own AI Roadmap at http://code.google.com/p/mindforth/wiki/RoadMap concurrently with my contributions to you guys' Roadmap. The main thing is, I was entering into the Roadmap Milestone of trying to achieve self-referential thought with my AI. That particular achievement requires covering a lot of ground, not just you and I interactions between the human user and the artificial AI Mind. The AI needs to acquire a general knowledge of the surrounding world, so that man and machine may discuss the AI as a participant in its world. So at the end of 2009 I was coding the ability of the AI to respond to who-queries and what-queries, so that the AI can deal with questions like Who are you? and What are you? Recently I have perceived the need to get the AI to respond with multiple answers to queries about topics where the AI knows not a single fact but multiple facts, such as, What do robots make? I want the AI to be able to say such things as: Robots make cars. Robots make tools. Robots make parts. Robots make robots. It dawned on me a few days ago that the AI software would have to suppress each given answer in order to move on to the next answer available in the knowledge base (KB). In other words, for the first time ever, I had to code _inhibition_ into the AI Mind. Tonight I have done so, and that simple conversation near the top of this message shows the results. The same query, of just the word boys..., elicits two different answers from the KB because each response from the AI goes immediately into inhibition in such a way as to allow access to the next fact queued up in the recesses of the AI KB. This Singularity Alert from Mentifex may generate a collective Huh? from the list readership, but here it is. Bye for now (and back to the salt mines :-) Arthur -- http://AiMind-i.com http://code.google.com/p/mindforth http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/307824.307853 http://robots.net/person/AI4U/diary/40.html --- 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
[agi] Tesla Journal Submission: Mentifex Mad Science
Mad Science Theory-Based Artificial Intelligence Abstract The patient insists that he has created an artificial Mind, a virtual entity capable of abstract thought and self-awareness. Further, his research is too dangerous to be published outside of the Tesla Journal, because Mentifex AI leads inexorably to an Extinction Level Event (ELE) known as the Technological Singularity. Crazies and mountebanks have flocked to the growing vanguard of self-styled Singularitarians, Transhumanists, Extropians, Netkooks, Lambda- Calculoids, Associate Professors, Double-Baggers, AI Fellows, Earth-Firsters, Neats and Scruffies, Idiot Savants and Boulevardier Poseurs ad nauseam et ad infinitum. Various camps come together annually at the Rainbow Gathering, the Singularity Summit, and the Indianapolis 500. http://aicookbook.com/wiki/Main_Page http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/2010-August/ http://practicalai.org http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/tesla.html http://www.teslajournal.com Mentifex Mad Scientist -- Mad people of comp.lang.lisp http://www.tfeb.org/lisp/mad-people.html --- 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
[agi] The Wrong Stuff (Norvig interview)
The Wrong Stuff : Error Message: Google Research Director Peter Norbig on Being Wrong http://bit.ly/cQpUpx translates to http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/thewrongstuff/archive/2010/08/03/error-message-google-research-director-peter-norvig-on-being-wrong.aspx --- 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] Computer Vision not as hard as I thought!
David Jones wrote: I've suddenly realized that computer vision of real images is very much solvable and that it is now just a matter of engineering. [...] Would you (or anyone else on this list) be interested in learning Forth and working on http://code.google.com/p/mindforth/wiki/VisRecog for the MindForth artificial intelligence? There would be no pay other than AI glory. You have already shown a keen AI interest at http://www.practicalai.org and so you could put your code and documentation up there. Arthur -- http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/mindforth.txt http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/AiMind.html http://AIMind-i.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] Huge Progress on the Core of AGI
David Jones wrote: Arthur, Thanks. I appreciate that. I would be happy to aggregate some of those things. I am sometimes not good at maintaining the website because I get bored of maintaining or updating it very quickly :) Dave On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 10:02 AM, A. T. Murray menti...@scn.org wrote: The Web site of David Jones at http://practicalai.org is quite impressive to me as a kindred spirit building AGI. (Just today I have been coding MindForth AGI :-) For his Practical AI Challenge or similar ventures, I would hope that David Jones is open to the idea of aggregating or archiving representative AI samples from such sources as - TexAI; - OpenCog; - Mentifex AI; - etc.; so that visitors to PracticalAI may gain an overview of what is happening in our field. Arthur -- http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/AiMind.html http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/mindforth.txt Just today, a few minutes ago, I updated the mindforth.txt AI souce code listed above. In the PracticalAi aggregates, you might consider listing Mentifex AI with copies of the above two AI source code pages, and with links to the original scn.org URL's, where visitors to PracticalAi could look for any more recent updates that you had not gotten around to transferring from scn.org to PracticalAi. In that way, theses releases of Mentifex free AI source code would have a more robust Web presence (SCN often goes down) and I could link to PracticalAi for the aggregates and other features of PracticalAI. Thanks. Arthur T. Murray --- 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] Huge Progress on the Core of AGI
The Web site of David Jones at http://practicalai.org is quite impressive to me as a kindred spirit building AGI. (Just today I have been coding MindForth AGI :-) For his Practical AI Challenge or similar ventures, I would hope that David Jones is open to the idea of aggregating or archiving representative AI samples from such sources as - TexAI; - OpenCog; - Mentifex AI; - etc.; so that visitors to PracticalAI may gain an overview of what is happening in our field. Arthur -- http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/AiMind.html http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/mindforth.txt lol. thanks Jim :) On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 10:08 PM, Jim Bromer jimbro...@gmail.com wrote: I have to say that I am proud of David Jone's efforts. He has really matured during these last few months. I'm kidding but I really do respect the fact that he is actively experimenting. I want to get back to work on my artificial imagination and image analysis programs - if I can ever figure out how to get the time. As I have read David's comments, I realize that we need to really leverage all sorts of cruddy data in order to make good agi. But since that kind of thing doesn't work with sparse knowledge, it seems that the only way it could work is with extensive knowledge about a wide range of situations, like the knowledge gained from a vast variety of experiences. This conjecture makes some sense because if wide ranging knowledge could be kept in superficial stores where it could be accessed quickly and economically, it could be used efficiently in (conceptual) model fitting. However, as knowledge becomes too extensive it might become too unwieldy to find what is needed for a particular situation. At this point indexing becomes necessary with cross-indexing references to different knowledge based on similarities and commonalities of employment. Here I am saying that relevant knowledge based on previous learning might not have to be totally relevant to a situation as long as it could be used to run during an ongoing situation. From this perspective then, knowledge from a wide variety of experiences should actually be composed of reactions on different conceptual levels. Then as a piece of knowledge is brought into play for an ongoing situation, those levels that seem best suited to deal with the situation could be promoted quickly as the situation unfolds, acting like an automated indexing system into other knowledge relevant to the situation. So the ongoing process of trying to determine what is going on and what actions should be made would simultaneously act like an automated index to find better knowledge more suited for the situation. Jim Bromer --- 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
[agi] Mindplex for Is-a Functionality
Thurs.22.JUL.2010 -- Mindplex for Is-a Functionality As we contemplate AI coding for responses to such questions as Who is Andru? What is Andru? Who are you? What are you? we realize that simple memory-activation of question-words like who or what will not be sufficient to invoke the special handling of mental issues raised by such question-words. Nay, we realize that each question-word will need to call not so much a mind-module of normal syntactic control, such as NounPhrase or VerbPhrase, but rather something like a WhoPlex or a WhatPlex or a WherePlex or even a WhyPlex, as a kind of meta-module which is not a building block of the cognitive architecture, but is rather a governance of the interaction of the regular mind-modules. A WhatPlex, for instance, in answering a What-is question, must predispose the AI Mind to provide a certain kind of information (e.g., ontological class) couched amid certain concomitant mind-modules (e.g., EnArticle a) so as to output an answer such as, I am a robot. Since the quasi-mind-modules to be invoked by question-words comprise a small cluster of similar mental complexes necessary for the special handling of the input of the question-words, we might as well designate the members of the set of complexes as code structures with names like WhatPlex ending in -Plex. Witness that the Google enterprise has named its campus or cluster of buildings as the Googleplex. Ben Goertzel has used a similar term to refer to a mindplex of mind components. We will try to use WhoPlex and WhatPlex to remind ourselves as AI appcoders that we are letting rules of special handling accumulate by an accretion akin to the emergence of a mental complex. Arthur -- See the HTML version below for its links. http://robots.net/person/AI4U/diary/23.html --- 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] Is there any Contest or test to ensure that a System is AGI?
Deepak wrote on Sun, 18 Jul 2010: I wanted to know if there is any bench mark test that can really convince a majority of today's AGIers that a System is true AGI? Obvious AGI functionality is the default test for AGI. http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/AiMind.html is an incipient AGI with slowly accreting AGI functionality and with easy accessability due to its running in the MSIE browser. Is there some real prize like the XPrize for AGI or AI in general? thanks, Deepak As others on the AGI list have pointed out, there may not yet be such an AGI Prize, but it would be easy to create one and announce it in http://groups.google.com/group/comp.programming.contests on Usenet. Meanwhile, in other A(G)I news, someone is creating an AI Cookbook in wiki format, with e.g. http://aicookbook.com/wiki/AiMind as a stub added yesterday by Yours Truly, ATM/Mentifex --- 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] Questions for an AGI
Carlos A Mejia invited questions for an AGI! If you could ask an AGI anything, what would you ask it? Who killed Donald Young, a gay sex partner of U.S. President Barak Obama, on December 24, 2007, in Obama's home town of Chicago, when it began to look like Obama could actually be elected president? Who had the most to gain from killing not only Donald Young but also Larry Bland on November 17, 2007, another gay member of Obama's Trinity United Church of Christ (TUCC) on Chicago's south side? It is not a question of Obama's privacy as a married gay man; it is a question of Murder Most Foul. Most likely, Obama did not arrange, orchestrate and order the suspicious cluster of homosexual deaths and murders in Chicago at the end of 2007, just before the year 2008 in which Obama became the first black president and acquired the power that he employed for the wanton murder of innocent (and also guilty) Arabs in Iraq and innocent citizens of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Most likely, somebody else did the Chicago killings for Obama, just like somebody else does the Iraq and Afghanistan killings for Obama. American soldiers, killing on behalf of Obama, recently killed a group of innocent women in Afghanistan. In order to hide their crime, Obama's soldiers approached the dead women's bodies, took out knives, and dug the bullets out of the dead women's bodies so as to obscure the fact that the killers of the women were in Obama's chain of command. It was your tax dollars at work, and your elected president carrying on the murders first initiated by George W. Bush. Bush Two, is what they are beginning to call Obama. Obama, who told the voters he would close down the Guantanamo concentration camp -- America's Auschwitz. Obama, who promised to bring home the troops but who instead, suckers, has enlarged the War To Make the World Safe for Opium and Heroin. Meanwhile, the mainstream media (MSM) think that they have a stranglehold on the dissemination and broadcasting of what is to be the news in America. If the MSM do not report something, then it never happened, right? What happens here in gangland gayland Chicago, stays here in gangland gayland Czechago, right? WRONG!!! Pomshchenie moyo, az vozdam, sayeth the Lord. -- Mentifex shouting STOP THE WARS, Mr. President! and We will persuade you to resign in disgrace. http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/20100522.html http://www.globemagazine.com/story/512 --- 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: AW: [agi] I Can't Be In Two Places At Once.
Ben Goertzel wrote: And, just to clarify: the fact that I set up this list and pay $12/month for its hosting, and deal with the occasional list-moderation issues that arise, is not supposed to give my **AI opinions** primacy over anybody else's on the list, in discussions I only intervene as moderator when discussions go off-topic, not to try to push my perspective on people ... and on the rare occasions when I am speaking as list owner/moderator rather than as just another AI guy with his own opinions, I try to be very clear that that is the role I'm adopting.. ben g Well, how come my posts aren't getting through? (Going out to the list) What do you call that? ATM/Mentifex -- http://code.google.com/p/mindforth/ --- 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=114414975-3c8e69 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
[agi] MindForth puts AI theory into practice.
Artificial Minds in Win32Forth are online at http://mind.sourceforge.net/mind4th.html and http://AIMind-i.com -- a separate AI branch. http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/js080819.html is the JavaScript AI Mind Programming Journal about the development of a tutorial program at http://mind.sourceforge.net/Mind.html for MSIE. ATM -- http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/win32forth/message/13808 --- 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=111637683-c8fa51 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Who here is located in the Seattle area?
Steve Richfield trolled like an Alaska fisherman: It has come to my attention that some of the mysterious masked men here are located in the Seattle/Bellevue area, as I now am. Perhaps we should get together face-to-face and discuss rather than type our thoughts? Steve Richfield Bellevue?! 'Fraid not, although I used to be a teacher of German and Latin at The Overlake School in Redmond. Seattle?! Yes. If you ever go to Northgate or to Green Lake or to the University of Washington off-campus area, I can meet you there -- especially in a coffee shop, such as the University Book Store cafe, or the Solstice Cafe, or any of the coffee shops at Northgate. To meet Mentifex at Green Lake in the summer, just ask the Seattle lifeguards to point out Arthur a.k.a. Crawdad Man (my sobriquet). Be carrying some kind of AI/neuroscience book, and the qui vive? challenge is Dr. Eliza, I presume? -- to be answered with Tell me more about Dr. Eliza. Arthur T. Murray/Mentifex -- http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/mentifex_faq.html --- agi Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=103754539-40ed26 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Pearls Before Swine...
The abnormalis sapiens Herr Doktor Steve Richfield wrote: Hey you guys with some gray hair and/or bald spots, WHAT THE HECK ARE YOU THINKING? prin Goertzel genesthai, ego eimi http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/mentifex_faq.html My hair is graying so much and such a Glatze is beginning, that I went in last month and applied for US GOV AI Funding, based on my forty+ quarters of work history for The Man. In August of 2008 the US Government will start funding my AI. ATM/Mentifex --- agi Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=103754539-40ed26 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
RE: [agi] Pearls Before Swine...
John G. Rose wrote: [...] Hey you guys with some gray hair and/or bald spots, WHAT THE HECK ARE YOU THINKING? prin Goertzel genesthai, ego eimi Before Goertzel came to be, I am. (a Biblical allusion in Greek :-) http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/mentifex_faq.html The above link is an update on 8 June 2008 of http://www.advogato.org/article/769.html from 2004. My hair is graying so much and such a Glatze is beginning, that I went in last month and applied for US GOV AI Funding, based on my forty+ quarters of work history for The Man. In August of 2008 the US Government will start funding my AI. In other words, Soc. Sec. will henceforh finance Mentifex AI. Does this mean that now maybe you can afford to integrate some AJAX into that JavaScript AI mind of yours? John No, because I remain largely ignorant of Ajax. http://mind.sourceforge.net/Mind.html and the JavaScript Mind User Manual (JMUM) at http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/userman.html will remain in JavaScript and not Ajax. As I continue to re-write the User Manual, I will press hard for the adoption of Mentifex AI in high-school classes on artificial intelligence. Arthur T. Murray --- agi Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=103754539-40ed26 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
[agi] Uses of Mind.html tutorial Artificial General Intelligence
For teaching computer programming. For teaching JavaScript to students. For learning JavaScript For teaching artificial intelligence at a school for the gifted. For teaching artificial intelligence on the high-school level. For teaching artificial intelligence at a community college. For teaching artificial intelligence at a university. For exploring artificial intelligence at a think tank. For teaching linguistics. For teaching neuroscience. For teaching psychology. For teaching philosophy, especially the philosophy of mind. For customized installation on a Web site to increase visitor traffic. For release on the Web to carry advertisements with viral marketing. As a prop for giving presentations on artificial intelligence. As a background element in a science fiction movie. * For venture capitalists to evaluate AI projects as a standard of comparison. As an AI Engine for core functionality in other AI development projects. For triggering a Technological Singularity. -- http://mind.sourceforge.net/Mind.html http://mind.sourceforge.net/userman.html --- agi Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=103754539-40ed26 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Random Thoughts on Thinking...
Steve Richfield wrote: The process that we call thinking is VERY different in various people. [...] [...] Any thoughts? Steve Richfield The post above -- real food for thought -- was the most interesting post that I have ever read on the AGI list. Arthur T. Murray -- http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/Mind.html http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/userman.html http://mind.sourceforge.net/mind4th.html http://mind.sourceforge.net/m4thuser.html --- agi Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=101455710-f059c4 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Posting Strategies - A Gentle Reminder
Bob Mottram writes: Good advice. There are of course sometimes people who are ahead of the field, Like Ben Goertzel (glad to send him a referral recently from South Africa on the OpenCog list :-) but in conversation you'll usually find that the genuine inovators have a deep - bordering on obsessive - knowledge of the field that they're working in and are willing to demonstrate/test their claims http://mind.sourceforge.net/Mind.html has just been updated to demonstrate the claim that AI has been solved. to anyone even remotely interested. Arthur -- http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/mind4th.html http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/m4thuser.html --- agi Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
[agi] Installing MindForth in a robot
Only robots above a certain level of sophistication may receive a mind-implant via MindForth. The computerized robot needs to have an operating system that will support Forth and sufficient memory to hold both the AI program code and a reasonably large knowledge base (KB) of experience. A Forth program is so portable from one version of Forth to another that robot manufacturers, vendors and users should not think of Mind.Forth as restricted to Win32Forth for implementation and operation, but as a candidate for upgrading to a 64-bit Forth running on a 64-bit system, thereby possessing a practically unlimited memory space. The Forth variant iForth is supposedly on its way to becoming a 64-bit Forth. People getting into Forth AI for the first time and with the option of adopting 64-bit technology from the very start, should do so with the realization that it will be an extremely long time before any further upgrade is made to 128-bit or higher technology. It is more likely that AI will go down into quantum technology before going up to 128-bit technology. So embrace and extend 64-bit AI. ATM -- http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/mind4th.html http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/m4thuser.html --- agi Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=95818715-a78a9b Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
[agi] Can MindForth feel emotions?
From the rewrite-in-progress of the User Manual -- 1.5 Can MindForth feel emotions? When a robot is in love, it needs to feel a physiological response to its internal state of mind. Regardless of what causes the love, the robot will not experience what the ancient Greeks called damenta phrenas himero (tamed in the heart by longing) unless some bodily manifestation of the longings of love interrupts the otherwise placid state of the robot mind and draws the conscious attention of the robot to its emotion. It could be as simple an affect as the emitting of a sound like thump-thump or tick-tock from a robot loudspeaker feeding back into a sensory microphone, so that the robot both generates and perceives the physiological disruption of its previous placidity. Makers of robots could program their nuts-and-volts counterpart to commence the loudspeaker thump-thump behavior for a brief period of time immediately following each recognition of the presence of the human by the bot. This automatic reaction might simply mystify the robot, who would wonder why it reacts so dramatically to the perceived presence of its human friend. Given the beat of the thump-thump sound, and given its perception by the robot, the fact of which emotion is felt is not a given, but hinges rather on the cognitive predisposition of the robot mind to feel any one of a range of possible emotions. The amateur roboticist who wants to inculcate emotions in a forthmindful robot has got to match the physiological manifestation of each emotion with an adequate sensory perception of the physiological event. Here in the first True AI User Manual, let us initiate and henceforth maintain the following roster of possible emotions in robots and their physiological concomitants. * love -- felt as a thump-thump of the virtual heart * anger -- felt as the flashing of a red warning light We may add to the list as clever robogeeks invent and demonstrate robust pairings of affect and percept for each emotion. On the other hand, robot-makers could endow their robots with the output-input pairings and let the robots themselves sort it out as to which emotion is called into sharp focus by each physical manifestation. The one group of people whom we do not want calling the robot emotion shots are the film directors and movie-makers. A massive, fiery explosion is not a proper evincing of anger or excitement in a robot tasked with vacuuming your carpet. The theory behind our plan for robot emotions is that, once there is a cognitive spark that could engender an emotion, such as a sudden and drastic cognitive predicament, the robot needs the involuntary bodily response and sensation thereof to sharpen and focus its attention upon the emotional feeling. Without the physiological jolt and its perception that bends the chain of thought, the intelligent robot has no cause to feel the target emotion. There must be a discontinuity in the thought-stream, or there can be no emotion. Even if the robot is only thinking about an emotion, there needs to be at least a memory of the actively felt physiological event. Early, disembodied versions of Mind.Forth obviously can not feel an emotion if they lack a body to smack the consciousness with the emotional ictus and to perceive what it feels like, but MindForth holds out the promise of robot emotions to pioneers in robot evolution who will incorporate MindForth. Try to have some interesting emotional displays that will cater but not pander to the insatiable lust of movie-makers for Gotterdammerung-gone-wild special effects and godzillas. ATM -- http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/emotion.html http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/mind4th.html http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/m4thuser.html - This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=94603346-a08d2f
[agi] Is MindForth conscious?
From the rewrite-in-progress of the User Manual -- 1.4 Is MindForth conscious? MindForth has been engineered for artificial consciousness but most likely will not report its own consciousness unless it is installed in a robot body with a sufficient motorium and adequate sensorium to engender self-awareness. Instead of having a consciousness module -- which would be impossible -- the MindForth software is geared towards having the proper flow of information for consciousness to emerge as an epiphenomenon on top of the otherwise mechanistic machinery of mind. Consciousness has to serve a purpose, or it would not even exist in nature. Perhaps the purpose of consciousness is to ensure the fastest possible speed of thought in the Darwinian fight for survival of the fittest. On the other hand, perhaps consciousness is a byproduct of the division of labor between sleep and the waking state in the maintenance of a central nervous system (CNS). Rest assured, however, that True AI Mind.Forth was truly built with consciousness in mind. In the section of this Manual on how Mind.Forth thinks, we read of the developmental decision to have syntax reach down into the conceptual plane and activate one single concept after another until a chain of thought is formed. That decision in 2001 was unwittingly a milestone on the long march towards machine consciousness in MindForth AI, because a few years later in 2005 a decision was made to have single activations move like a wave through the mindgrid, based on the earlier idea from 2001 that the process of NLP generation chases activation from concept to concept. If we think of consciousness as the constantly shifting focus of the searchlight of attention, then our Moving Wave Algorithm (MWA) facilitates consciousness by keeping only one concept active at a time in the AI Mind. The MWA at the same time facilitates the subconscious area of the mind, where previously active concepts slowly decrease their activation on a slide into temporary oblivion. The subconscious area, however, facilitates meandering chains of thought, because semi-activated concepts remain briefly available for inclusion in an incipient thought. Consciousness, then, because it includes the subconscious, may be a necessary conditio sine qua non for the very existence of rational intellect engaging in thought. ATM -- http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/mind4th.html http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/m4thuser.html - This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244id_secret=94603346-a08d2f
[agi] Does MindForth think?
From the rewrite-in-progress of the User Manual -- 1.3 Does MindForth think? The whole purpose of Mind.Forth is to think. It is an embodiment of the Cartesian Cogito ergo sum -- I think, therefore I am. Mind.Forth does indeed think, but the real questions here are, how does Mind.Forth think, and what proof is there that Mind.Forth thinks? Mind.Forth thinks by having concepts at a deep level in the artificial mind, and by letting activation spread from one concept to another to another in a chain of thought under the guidance of a Chomskyan linguistic superstructure (syntax). Even without the syntax -- Greek for ordering together -- Mind.Forth would be able to associate from concept to concept and exhibit the purposive behavior of an animal such as, say, a dog, which shows a certain level of understanding in a complex activity such as inviting a human being to throw a stick and then chasing and fetching the stick and bringing it back and laying it on the ground. In fact, up until late 2001, the Mind.Forth algorithm tried to think all the concepts in a three-word sentence at once. The software would simultaneously activate the three words of three concepts in a subject-verb-object (SVO) order and proceed to generate a sentence with the three active words. Then one of those funny things happened on the way to the Singularity. In the AI Mind programming, the question arose whether the linguistic superstructure should reach down, as it were, and activate the entire incipient sentence as a finished product of mind, or -- and here was a major confontation with the unknown quandaries of AI -- should the governing syntax reach down into the conceptual grid and not only activate one concept at a time, but also let the activated concept have a say, so to speak, in the selection of the next concept to activate, and then likewise from the current concept on to the next concept? And should the chain of thought not be determined in advance, but rather unfold in the very process of generating an idea? The Mind.Forth author Mentifex decided to adopt the method of letting each concept in the chain determine the direction of the chain, and Mentifex suddenly realized that the thought process of such a linguistically guided mechanism was inherently more powerful than the simple, underlying alternative of letting concepts activate each other in a loose, unguided chaining of activations. In other words, syntactically guided thinking, as invented rather blindly by human beings, gives rise to the Albert Einsteins and the Benjamin Goertzels of this world. Now, what proof is there that Mind.Forth thinks? The proof is in what Dr. Goertzel calls an existence proof. Run the AI mind and observe, s'il vous plait, that thinking occurs. The thinking is very primitive indeed, but we are at the dawn of True AI in the world. The reason why Mind.Forth exhibits thinking, when other ambitious AI projects have failed to do so, is that Mind.Forth implements its own unique theory of mind. It was far more difficult for the independent AI scholar Mentifex to develop the theory of mind for MindForth than to write the MindForth software, although both endeavors each took over a dozen years of work. The Wright borthers figured out the theory of flight, and then they made and flew the first airplane in 1903. There are people who try to create an AI without having a theory of AI, and if they are lucky a theory will come to them along the way. With Mind.Forth you get the theory and the AI. ATM -- http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/mind4th.html http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/m4thuser.html - 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=8660244id_secret=94603346-a08d2f
[agi] History of MindForth
From the rewrite-in-progress of the User Manual -- 1.2 History of MindForth In the beginning was Mind.REXX on the Commodore Amiga, which the author Mentifex began coding in July of 1993, and publicizing in the Usenet comp.lang.rexx newsgroup. The late Pushpinder Singh of MIT sent e-mail expressing his amazement that anyone would try to do AI in REXX. Mentifex mailed back the entire Mind.REXX source code. Another fellow, an IBM mainframe programmer, tried to port the Amiga Rexxmind to run on his IBM mainframe -- which would have been a Kitty-Hawk-to-Concorde leap -- but the REXX AI code was not fit for IBM consumption. When Mind.REXX thought its first thought in late 1994, Mentifex posted news of the event in Usenet newsgroups for many of the most significant programming languages. Only the Forth community took up the AI challenge and expressed any interest in translating the AI program. A maker of Forth chips gave advice and counsel, and a maker of robots requested a copy of Mind.REXX for porting into the Forth in which he programmed his robots. Sorely disappointed at not having established a colony of AI Minds on IBM mainframes, Mentifex resolved to learn Forth on his own and assist in the porting of Mind.REXX into Mind.Forth for use in amateur robotics. Mentifex bought a copy of Starting Forth at a used book store and recorded his pilgrim's progress in the first volume of the Mind.Forth Programming Journal (MFPJ). The amateur robot-maker, a professional engineer, flew to Seattle on business with Boeing and visited Mentifex in his Vaierre apartment with a lesson on Forth coding. Another engineer, formerly with IBM and a REXX expert who had helped Mentifex in the coding of Mind.REXX AI, flew to the Bay area for a REXX conference at S.L.A.C. and was treated to dinner by the maker of Forth chips. Unfortunately, Mentifex did not try hard enough to learn Forth and the Forthmind project languished in 1996 and 1997 -- while Netizens were attacking Mentifex for daring to claim that he had developed a theory of mind for AI. It gradually dawned on Mentifex that in every Usenet newsgroup related to AI or robotics, there was always one fellow who considered himself the ultimate authority on the subject matter of the newsfroup, and woe unto anyone, especially an independent scholar like Mentifex, who dared to make an extraordinary scientific claim (ESC) on so grave a matter as announcing actual progress in AI. When the alpha male of comp.robotics.misc (a really cool guy, by the way) bracchiated over to Mentifex in the group in 1997 and launched an unseemingly vicious ad hominem attack, Mentifex knew not how to defend himself and was overcome with feelings of immense gratitude when the foxie Forth chip maker smote the troublemaker a mighty blow in defense of Mentifex. Forthwith Mentifex took up Forth again and devoted the entire year of 1998 to porting Mind.REXX into the native language of telescopes and robots -- Forth. In Mind.REXX, Mentifex had gone overboard in creating variables for even the slightest chance that they might turn out to be useful. Nobody had ever written a True AI before, it was all uncharted territory, and it seemed better to err on the side of too many variables rather than too few. In Forth, however, variables are anathema. Forthers prefer to put a value on the stack instead of in a variable. Mentifex never became a genuine, maniacally obsessive Forth programmer, but chose to program his AI in Forth code that looked enough like other languages to be easy to understand and to be easy to port from Forth. While Mentifex moved his AI coding efforts from MVP-Forth on the Amiga to F-PC on IBM clones and finally to Win32Forth, he also in 2001 (a space odyssey) suddenly ported MindForth into JavaScript so that users could just click on a link and have the Tutorial AI Mind flit across the 'Net and and take up albeit brief residence on their MSIE computer. While Push Singh was simply amazed at doing AI in REXX, many Netizens openly laughed and sneered at the idea of coding an AI Mind in JavaScript, which was not by any means a traditional AI language. Mentifex, however, suspected that his Mind.html in JavaScript was slowly building the largest installed user base of any AI program in the world, because it was so easy to save-to-disk the Mind.html code and because Site Meter logs reported the spread of the AI. Mentifex fell into the practice of switching back and forth between coding AI in JavaScript for a while and then in Forth. In March of 2005 Mentifex began coding powerful diagnostic routines into MindForth. He began to find and eliminate bugs that he could not deal with earlier because he had not even suspected their existence. Meanwhile, Mr. Frank J. Russo began to code what became http://AIMind-i.com -- a version of the Forthmind with its own site on the Web and with special abilities far beyond those of
Re: [agi] What is MindForth?
Joseph Gentle wrote on Sun, 10 Feb 2008, in a message now at http://www.mail-archive.com/agi@v2.listbox.com/msg09803.html On Feb 9, 2008 11:53 PM, A. T. Murray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is not a chatbot. The AI engine is arguably the first True AI. It is immortal. Cool! What has it done to convince you that its truly intelligent? -J Intelligent means understanding. When MindForth receives a sentence of English input (in the proper subject-verb-object format, for now), it understands the sentence by creating concept-nodes for the English words and by creating associative tags to link one concept to another. Thus the AI Mind knows the information asserted by the English sentence, and can include the asserted idea in its own thinking. Now for a miniature progress report on Mentifex AI. http://mind.sourceforge.net/audstm.html has been updated with a name-change to audSTM Auditory Short Term Memory module of free open-source MindForth True AI with the complete Table of Contents of the Mind.Forth User Manual listed at page-bottom with active URL-links. We shall see if happenstance websurfers decide to try out any of the AI features as listed in the Mind.Forth User Manual. Gentlemen, mesdames, brace yourselves for a ballooning Technological Singularity. ATM -- http://mind.sourceforge.net/mind4th.html http://mind.sourceforge.net/m4thuser.html - 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=8660244id_secret=94603346-a08d2f
[agi] What is MindForth?
From the rewrite-in-progress of the User Manual -- 1.1 What is MindForth? Mind.Forth AI is a rudimentary replica of the human mind programmed in the Forth programming language. The AI Mind is the software implementation of a theory of mind based on Chomskyan linguistics -- the rules and structures of thought in natural human language. The Forthmind software is an open-source free AI download in the public domain. It is not a chatbot. The AI engine is arguably the first True AI. It is immortal. ATM -- http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/mind4th.html http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/m4thuser.html - 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=8660244id_secret=93139505-4aa549
[agi] Using Mind.Forth in a CS AI course
From the rewrite-in-progress of the User Manual -- 1.6 Uses of MindForth 1.6.1 For a Computer Science course in artificial intelligence Just as a JavaScript program can be serverside or clientside, an AI Mind program can be teacher-side or student-side in an academic environment. If you are a professor of computer science at the postgraduate or undergraduate level, you may use Mind.Forth anywhere on a range from peremptory dismissal to centering your AI course around an acceptance of MindForth as the first True AI. If you choose to dismiss the phenomenon of Mind.Forth, you may make a few si tacuisses disparaging remarks and get on with publish-or-perish as usual. At the other end of the range, and especially if you are trying to teach AI with extremely limited financial and hardware resources, you may use the free-on-line AI4U textbook and its also free-of-charge double enhancements in the form of updated chapter-pages and Wikipedia background links. If you are a student taking an AI or robotics course, you may subvert the dominant paradigm by introducing Mind.Forth as subject matter for consideration during the course. At the very least, your presentation should include a live demonstration of Mind.Forth thinking and cycling through its various AI Mind features, such as asking or answering questions, and the Rejuvenation process. You may go further by asking the instructor if you may do a project on Mind.Forth, up to and including a doctoral dissertation, or possibly including a rewrite of this User Manual for local use at the institution where a special course on AI/robotics is being given. ATM -- http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/mind4th.html http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/m4thuser.html - 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=8660244id_secret=93139505-4aa549
[agi] Re: Mindforth and the Wright Brothers
Richard Loosemore wrote: [...] Arthur, if there is an analogy between Mindforth and the Wright Brothers, then you, alas, are just standing on the sand at Kitty Hawk, waving your hands up and down and shouting I can flap! I can flap!. After they achieved true airplane functionality, apparently at least one newspaper -- perhaps The Loosemore Gazette -- published an article expressing disbelief in the preposterous claim by the Wright brothers that they had achieved flight. I am only claiming thought. You don't have to build Concorde at the first attempt, you just have to get your plane off the ground and show that it can travel any distance at all under its own power. Let me sketch out a few not-so-obvious details here. When ATM/Mentifex here comes in and announces MindForth achieves True AI functionality, as at http://onsingularity.com/item/3175 -- the frequent posters such as yourself issue a few off-the-cuff remarks and the issue falsely seems settled in the way that you try to steer it. But meanwhile, as the open Site Meter logs on most Mentifex AI pages indicate, there are those more silent types around the world who actually investigate the true-AI claims and who proceed to spend over an hour examining dozens of pages in the voluminous Mentifex AI documentation. Others make their own local copies of the Mentifex webpages and still initiate a Site Meter log report whenever the page is called up. IF (big IF) the true-AI claim is true, people who silently exploit the technology won't be as vociferous about it as I have been. For instance, about six months ago, a lot of telecommunications companies around the world started looking closely at Mentifex AI. I have no idea what their conclusions were, but they seemed to be acting upon some sort of rumor being passed around in their own industry. Meanwhile, imagine this scenario. As various versions of Mind.Forth are released, some people grab a local copy of it, download 4.2 Win32Forth, and experiment with the AI on their hard drive. See what I'm getting at? -- _branches_ in the distribution and evolution of the AI Forthmind. After 22 January 2008, any such local installation of the Forthmind is a viable, thinking AI. Sure, MindForth gets better and better with each new release, but each new release, especially any with added features and with new functionality, gets harder and harder to understand as a program. So it is good if these sideways, lateral branches of MindForth diaspora occur, because someone somewhere may stumble upon the true-AI programs and start working on them over the years. I assumed that your own description of what Mindforth did was accurate (it was, wasn't it?) Yes, but MindForth has to be seen in action to be appreciated for the fluidity of its thought processes. Prior to 22 January 2008, the incipient thoughts always went off the rails, due to bugs and glitches. and on that basis I saw it merely flapping its wings in the same way that Eliza did 30 years ago. http://AIMind-i.com is also flapping its wings on behalf of open-source AI in Win32Forth. Now I have to get back to such things as updating http://mind.sourceforge.net/m4thuser.html -- the Mind.Forth User Manual. Arthur - 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=8660244id_secret=93795291-f96d68
Re: [agi] The Test
Mike Tintner wrote in the message archived at http://www.mail-archive.com/agi@v2.listbox.com/msg09744.html [...] The first thing is that you need a definition of the problem, and therefore a test of AGI. And there is nothing even agreed about that - although I think most people know what is required. This was evident in Richard's recent response to ATMurray's recent declaring of his Agi system. Richard clearly knew pretty well why that system failed the AGI test but he didn't have an explicit definition of the test at his fingertips. Richard Loosemore clearly knew pretty well nothing of the sort. His was a lazy man's response. He did not download and experiment with the MindForth program at http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/mind4th.html and http://mind.sourceforge.net/mind4th.html -- he only made a few generalizations about what he lazily _thought_ MindForth might be doing. In the archive http://www.mail-archive.com/agi@v2.listbox.com/msg09674.html Richard Loosemore vaguely compares sophisticated MindForth with the canned-reponse Eliza program -- which nobody ever claimed was an artificial intelligence. Richard Loosemore furthermore suggested that all of the cognitive processes in the Eysenck Keane textbook of Cognitive Psychology would have to be implemented in MindForth before it could be said to have achieved True AI functionality. That demand is like telling Wilbur and Orville Wright that they have to demo a transatlantic French Concorde jet before they may claim to have achieved true airplane functionality. Sorry, Richard, but the AI breakthrough functionality is, plain and simple, the ability to think -- to activate an associative string of concepts and to express the thinking in the generative grammar of Chomsky. There is no requirement that people be other than lazy, smug and self-satisfied on this AGI list. I felt that I should announce the end of the decade-long process of debugging MindForth AI. Now the controversy has spilled over to http://onsingularity.com/item/3175 and the dust has not yet settled. Richard is beginning to act like ESY! The test, I suggest, is essentially; not the Turing Test or anything like that but The General Test. If your system is an AGI, or has AGI potential, then it must first of all have a skill and be able to solve problems in a given doman. [...] The skill of MindForth is spreading activation -- from concept to concept -- under the direction of a Chomksyan linguistic superstructure. Now I would like to digress and draw Ben Goertzel's math-minded attention to my latest creative idea at http://mind.sourceforge.net/computationalization.html#syllogism where on 30 January 2008 I thought up and loaded-up: It may be possible to endow an AI mind with the ability to think in syllogisms by creating super-concepts or set-concepts above and beyond, and yet in parallel with, the ordinary concepts. Certain words like all or never may be coded to duplicate a governed concept and to endow the duplicate with only one factual or asserted attribute, namely the special relationship modified by the all or never assertion. Take, for instance, the following. All fish have tails. Tuna are fish. Tuna have tails. When the AI mind encounters an all proposition involving the verb have and the direct object tails, a new, supervenient concept of fish-as-set is created to hold only one class of associative nodes -- the simultaneous association to have and to the tail concept. Whenever the basic fish concept is activated, the fish-as-set concept is also activated, ready to pounce, as it were, with the supervenient assertion that all fish have tails. Thenceforth, when any animal is identified as being a fish by some kind of isA tag, the fish-as-set concept is also activated and the AI mind superveniently knows that the animal in question has a tail. The machine reasoning could go somewhat like the following dialog. Do tuna have tails? Are tuna plants? Tuna are animals. What kind of animals? Tuna are fish. All fish have tails. Tuna have tails. The ideas above conform with set theory and with the notion of neuronal prodigality -- that there need be no concern about wasting neuronal resources -- and with the idea of inheritance in object-oriented programming (OOP). Whereas normally a new fiber might be attached to the fiber-gang of a redundantly entertained concept, it is just as easy to engender a concept-as-set fiber in parallel with the original, basic concept. For some basic concepts, there might be multiple concept-as-set structures reperesenting multiple all or never ideas believed to be the truth about the basic, ordinary concept. The AI mind thinking about an ordinary concept in the course of problem-solving, does not have to formally engage in the obvious syllogism that can be drawn from the given situation, but
Re: [agi] MindForth achieves True AI functionality
In response to Richard Loosemore below, A. T. Murray wrote: MindForth free open AI source code on-line at http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/mind4th.html has become a True AI-Complete thinking mind after years of tweaking and debugging. On 22 January 2008 the AI Forthmind began to think effortlessly and almost flawlessly in loops of meandering chains of thought. Users are invited to download the AI Mind and decide for themselves if what they see is machine intelligence and thinking. The http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/m4thuser.html User Manual explains all the steps involved. MindForth is the Model-T of True AI software, roughly comparable to the state of the art in automobiles one hundred years ago in 1908. As such, the AI in Forth will not blow you away with any advanced features, but will subtly show you the most primitive display of spreading activation among concepts. The world's first publicly available True AI achieves meandering chains of thought by detouring away from incomplete ideas lacking knowledge-base data and by asking questions of the human user when the AI is unable to complete a sentence of thought. The original MindForth program has spawned http://AIMind-I.com as the first offspring in the evolution of artificial intelligence. ATM/Mentifex Okay now you got my attention. Arthur: what has it achieved with its thinking? Up until Tues.22.JAN.2008 (four days ago) the AI would always encounter some bug that derailed its thinking. But starting three years ago in March of 2005 I coded extensive diagnostic routines into MindForth. Gradually it stopped spouting gibberish (a frequent complaint against Mentifex AI), but still countless bugs kept popping up that I had to deal with one after another. Suddenly on 22.JAN.2008 there were no show-stopper bugs anymore -- just glitches in need of improvement. Can you show an example of its best cogitations? You can tell it a multitude of subject-verb-object (SVO) facts, and then you can query it in various ways. Now the following thing is a very new development. Six years ago, when I was gearing up to publish AI4U, my goal for the AI output was (then) that it should parrot back each sentence of input, because, after all, each SVO concept had been activated by the mere fact of input. A few weeks ago, that goal changed to what the AI does now -- it briefly activates only one concept at a time, of either input or reentrant output. So now if you enter cats eat fish, the AI briefly activates each concept, coming to rest on the FISH concept (which is new to the AI). Immediately the SVO mind-module starts to generate a sentence about the active FISH concept, but the verbPhrase module fails to find a suffciently active verb. The detour variable then detours the thought process all the way up the Chomskyan syntactic superstructure to the SVO module, or the English module even higher, or maybe to the Think module higher still (I don't remember without inspecting the code), where the detour-flag calls the whatAuxSDO (what-do-Subjects-do) module to ask the human user a question about FISH. As the AI stands right now today since 24.JAN.2008, the output will look like FISHWHAT DO FISH DO If the human user (or person in job category attendant) answers the question, then the AI knows one more fact, and continues the dialogue with the human user. But (and this is even more interesting) if the human user just sits there to watch the AI think and does not answer the question, the AI repeats the question a few times. Then, in a development I coded also on Tues.22.JAN.2008 because the AI display was so bland and boring, a thotnum (thought-number) system detects the repetitious thought inherent in the question, and diverts the train of thought to the EGO self-resuscitation module, which activates the oldest post-vault concept in the self-rejuvenating memory of the AI Mind. Right now the AI just blurts out the name of the oldest concept (say, CATS) and I need to code in some extra activation to get a sentence going. But if you converse with the AI using known words or if you answer all queries about unknown words, you and the AI gradually fill its knowledge base with SVO-type facts -- not a big ontology like in the Cyc that Stephen Reed worked on, but still a large domain of subject-verb-object possibilities. You may query the KB in several ways, e.g.: what do cats eat cats cats eat and so forth, entered as a line of user input. If it is just producing meandering chains of thought then this is not AI, because randome chains of thought are trivially easy to produce (it was done already in the 1960s). The difference here in January of 2008 is that the words forming the thoughts are conceptualized, and thought in MindForth occurs only by spreading activation. Eventually there will be fancier forms of thought, such as prepositional phrases, but in this Model-T
[agi] MindForth 15.JAN.2008
Mind.Forth Programming Journal (MFPJ) Tues.15.JAN.2008 Yesterday on 14 January 2008 the basic scaffolding for the Moving Wave Algorithm of artificial intelligence was installed in Mind.Forth and released on the Web. Now it is time to clean up the code a little and to deal with some stray activations that interfere with the proper generation of meandering streams of thought. First in psiDamp we are re-introducing the single call to psiDecay, so that post-thought lopsi concepts will gradually lose their activation over time. We need to get rid of the newpsi and prequel and psicrest variables, because with lopsi and hipsi we were able to get the job done in exemplary fashion. Having eliminated or commented out the obsolete variables, now we are trying to debug the stray activations. When we enter a known word like kids or robots and we press [RETURN], we get a line of output such as follows. Robot: ROBOTS WHAT DO ROBOTS DO The AI speaks the word ROBOTS because it is starting an SVO sentence with ROBOTS as the subject. At first, the activation of ROBOTS sends a spike of twenty (20) to the verb NEED -- which has no subconscious activation because it exists in enBoot and not as a recent thought. ROBOTS #39 w. act 48 at I = 186 sending spike 20 to seq #74 NEED at act 0 yields 20 and zone = 181 20 (lim = 63) for t=183 NEED engram; spike = 20 R The enBoot verb NEED gets rejected with a message-line. verbPhr: detour because verb-activation is only 12 We see from the following diagnostic output display that the Audition module has been calling psiDamp to de-activate the ROBOTS concept after the hearing of each individual letter in the ROBOTS word. R psiDamp called for urpsi = 39 by module ID #104 Audition psiDecay called to reduce all conceptual activations. O psiDamp called for urpsi = 39 by module ID #104 Audition psiDecay called to reduce all conceptual activations. B psiDamp called for urpsi = 39 by module ID #104 Audition psiDecay called to reduce all conceptual activations. O psiDamp called for urpsi = 39 by module ID #104 Audition psiDecay called to reduce all conceptual activations. T psiDamp called for urpsi = 39 by module ID #104 Audition psiDecay called to reduce all conceptual activations. S psiDamp called for urpsi = 39 by module ID #104 Audition psiDecay called to reduce all conceptual activations. psiDamp called for urpsi = 39 by module ID #104 Audition psiDecay called to reduce all conceptual activations. psiDamp called for urpsi = 39 by module ID #104 Audition psiDecay called to reduce all conceptual activations. Well, isn't that result weird? By briefly changing the module ID # above to 42 for external input and to 35 for internal flow, we discovered multiple psiDamp calls during the internal reentry of each word being thought. R psiDamp called for urpsi = 39 by module ID #35 psiDecay called to reduce all conceptual activations. O psiDamp called for urpsi = 39 by module ID #35 psiDecay called to reduce all conceptual activations. B psiDamp called for urpsi = 39 by module ID #35 psiDecay called to reduce all conceptual activations. O psiDamp called for urpsi = 39 by module ID #35 psiDecay called to reduce all conceptual activations. T psiDamp called for urpsi = 39 by module ID #35 psiDecay called to reduce all conceptual activations. S psiDamp called for urpsi = 39 by module ID #35 psiDecay called to reduce all conceptual activations. psiDamp called for urpsi = 39 by module ID #35 psiDecay called to reduce all conceptual activations. The concept of ROBOTS keeps being set to the same residuum by psiDamp, but the NEED concept keeps getting psi-decayed until its activation drops too low for validation as a good verb to go with the word ROBOTS as a subject. We vaguely suspect that the reentry of each character in ROBOTS is being treated as if the character were a whole word by itself, so that the trough triggger code gets activated not merely once, but many times. Aha! During reentry, the SPEECH module is setting pov to 35 and calling AUDITION for each character being pronounced by the SPEECH module. Therefore the Audition trough trigger is being set to one (1) for each and every character being reentered from the SPEECH mind-module. There should be some easy fix for this bug, such as perhaps creating a special flag to indicate that reentry is in progress. However, at this point we would like to remark that, after the extremely difficult lopsi/hipsi coding of yesterday, we may finally be in the close-to-True-AI phase where the major bugs have been solved and we are only clearing out minor bugs -- which nevertheless prevent the AI from functioning flawlessly as True AI. We had better check the table of variables and the JavaScript Mind.html source code to see if
[agi] MindForth AI updated 27.DEC.2007
Mind.Forth Programming Journal (MFPJ) Thurs.27.DEC.2007 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/win32forth/message/13076 In Mind.Forth artificial intelligence for robots, as we try to make the AI Mind balk at thinking a thought for which it has insufficent knowledge, we need to coordinate a drastic reduction of post-thought activation of concepts in the psiDamp mind-module with a testing for too little activation on candidate-verbs in the verbPhrase module. The psiDamp module must make sure that conceptual activations are low -- but not too low for a meandering chain of thought to snake its way through the knowledge base (KB) blanketing the mindgrid. In the verbPhrase module, the detour variable must abort and force into detour any incipient thought for which all candidate verbs have too low an activation for a KB-compatible thought to arise. Human input of a new word properly used as a direct object should not permit the AI to use the same word as the subject of a nonsense statement connecting the new word with some inappropriate verb that chances to have a modicum of conceptual activation. Instead, verbPhrase should reject low-activation verbs and detour the AI Mind into asking a question, or making a self-referential EGO-module statement, or finding something else to think about in a thought-engendering traversal of the AI knowledge base. In the verbPhrase module we try using the following code. act @ 13 IF \ Detour away from selecting a low-activation verb. 1 detour ! \ 27dec2007 Set the detour flag to 1-as-true. fyi @ 2 = IF \ 27dec2007 In Tutorial mode show any detour taken. CR . verbPhr: detouring when verb-activation is only act @ . THEN \ 27dec2007 End of test for Tutorial mode LEAVE \ 27dec2007 Stop low-activation verb before SPEECH. THEN \ 27dec2007 End of test for verb with activation too low. There seems to be a problem with too high an activation being set when the human user enters a new word as input. For example, after FISH EAT BUGS is said by the robot looping through a chain of thoughts, the human user types in fish eat eggs and waits for a response. After a line of diagnostic code reveals verbPhr: act = 24 the AI Mind incorrectly utters the thought EGGS EAT EGGS in response, because at twenty-four (24) the activation on the EAT verb was too high to fail the detour test that would have aborted the incipient nonsense-thought of EGGS EAT EGGS. Luckily, however, we know that human user input has a cognitive privilege of leaving relatively high activation on words contained in the input stream, so that the AI Mind will pay attention to user input and generate a response. There may be a problem in the Audition mind-module, where the following code reveals a high setting on actset -- the variable used to decrement input activation in such a way that subject, verb and object have descending activations. \ 31 actset ! \ 1apr2007 From JSAI CR() module. 27 actset ! \ 4apr2007 Aiming for a wider S-V-O gap. 1 lastword ! \ 3apr2007 To reset seq tag The above code may explain why there was so high an activation as twenty-four (24) on the verb EAT in our Mind.Forth Programming Journal (MFPJ) entry of 19.DEC.2007. We have an opportunity now to lower the initial actset value at the end of the enBoot module and the actset used in the Audition module. By lowering the actset values gradually, we may observe any drastic changes in AI mind functionality. Meanwhile the AI Mind is continuing its shakedown cruise as it becomes better and better at maintaining meandering chains of thought. Values and settings which interfere with chains of thought are gradually being adjusted into relative harmony in a search for ideal rather than merely adequate settings. In verbPhrase we have changed important code as follows. \ motjuste @ 0 = IF 7 EMIT THEN \ 3apr2007 A test. \ motjuste @ 0 = IF 7 EMIT THEN \ 27dec2007 Commenting out above. motjuste @ 0 = IF \ 27dec2007 1 detour ! \ 27dec2007 Set the detour flag to 1-as-true. fyi @ 2 = IF \ 27dec2007 In Tutorial mode show any detour taken. CR . verbPhr: detouring when no candidate-verb is found. THEN \ 27dec2007 End of test for Tutorial mode LEAVE \ 27dec2007 Go back up to any calling module. e.g., SVO. THEN \ 27dec2007 End of test for no candidate verb found. It is time to upload our code for release on the Web, because we have implemented the detour-trigger in the verbPhrase module, as indicated in the MindForth changelog. \ 17dec07A.F introduces detour as abort-flag for insufficient knowledge. \ 19dec07A.F flushes out verb-activation-too-high and BIRDS-as-IS bugs. \ 23dec07B.F solves aboriginal audRecog false-positive recognition bug. \ 27dec07A.F causes verbPhrase to LEAVE when a detour-condition is met. Although we have not coded SVO to detour into questions, EGO, or KB-traversal,
[agi] Mind.Forth Programming Journal (MFPJ) 14.DEC.2007
After solving the aboriginal audRecog bug in 5dec07B.F, now we need to perform a few housekeeping details as we move on in the Mind.Forth coding. We must do the following. We must convert some of the 5dec07B.F troubleshooting messages into genuine diagnostic-mode messages. One way to proceed would be to have the messages appear at first in Tutorial mode to make sure that everything looks okay, then relegate the messages to Diagnostic mode for future use. We need to comment out the superfluous psi coding that was apparently a blind alley in the audRecog module, so as to make sure that we do not really need the code, which would only distract programmers from what is really going on in the audRecog module. Then later we must delete the commented-out code. Maybe we should solve the bug next in line before we do the housekeeping details, because we do not want to interfere in the solving of the next-in-line bug. The bugs involves the fact that, when the self (I) concept is activated, the AI properly says, I HELP KIDS, but then improperly says KIDS MAKE KIDS instead of KIDS MAKE ROBOTS. To the, ahem, experienced eye, this bug looks like a simple case of mis-assigned activation-values, as discussed in the actrules.html webpage file, but the bug could turn out to be far more serious. As we try to troubleshoot the path of activations, we gradually conclude that the Diagnostic mode will eventually have to be geared to displaying mainly activation-events. Let's try using a lower residuum in psiDamp. Second Session No, lowering residuum did not help. Let's see if spreadAct is not searching far enough for the seq tag leading to a direct object. It worked! We increased the seq zone from +7 to +9, and all of a sudden the AI could find such a long direct object as ROBOTS. --- Sat.15.DEC.2007 Our remedial action is too much of an ad-hoc solution, and we need to perform a more general re-make of the use of the zone variable in the spreadAct module. Perhaps we will widen the zone far enough to include even the longest words, and use a LEAVE statement to exit the operation when a pre or seq is found, or perhaps we will simply declare an unbudging seq by only letting the seq slot be filled once per search. We also need to import the use of an abort mechanism such as the var abort = false; // 29dec2006 For orchestration of sentence-generation. that we use in the JavaScript AI (JSAI) Mind. As the Forthmind gets better and better at sloshing activation over onto the correct direct object as found by a seq search, the situation will tend to arise that the AI Mind lacks sufficient knowledge to think about the found direct object as the subject of a new sentence. Instead, the AI needs to abort any generation of a thought that can not be completed for lack of knowledge. At the same time that a lack-of-knowledge sentence is aborted, the AI should call the wtAuxSDo module to ask a question that could potentially elicit the missing knowledge from either an attendant human being or from a search of the Internet. The AI should pause and give the human attendant extra time in which to answer the wtAuxSDo question. The Tutorial mode should indicate that the AI is calling wtAuxSDo instead of SVO. If no answer is forthcoming from the wtAuxSDo question, it would be a good time to invoke the EGO resuscitation module so that the AI generates a self-referential thought instead of trying to pursue a line of thought for which it lacks enough knowledge to think reasonably. On the other hand, more advanced routines might simply let ideas queue up so that thought turns to a traversal of semi-activated chunks of knowledge contained in the knowledge-base (KB) of the AI Mind. ATM -- http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/mind4th.html - 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=8660244id_secret=76435084-f5d600
Re: [agi] AGI and Deity
John G. Rose wrote: It'd be interesting, I kind of wonder about this sometimes, if an AGI, especially one that is heavily complex systems based would independently come up with the existence some form of a deity. http://mind.sourceforge.net/theology.html is my take on the subject. Different human cultures come up with deity(s), for many reasons; I'm just wondering if it is like some sort of mathematical entity that is natural to incompleteness and complexity (simulation?) or is it just exclusively a biological thing based on related limitations. [...] Pertinent jokes... Human: Is there a God? Supercomputer: Now there is. A mighty FORTRAN is our God. ATM -- http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/rjones.html - 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=8660244id_secret=74031940-f9af77
Re: [agi] None of you seem to be able ...
Mike Tintner wrote on Thu, 6 Dec 2007: ATM: http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/mind4th.html -- an AGI prototype -- has just gone through a major bug-solving update, and is now much better at maintaining chains of continuous thought -- after the user has entered sufficient knowledge for the AI to think about. It doesn't have - you didn't try to give it - independent curiosity (like an infant)? No, sorry, but the Forthmind does have an Ask module at http://mentifex.virtualenty.com/ask.html for asking questions -- which, come to think of it, may be a form of innate curiosity. Meanwhile a year and a half after receiving a bug report, the current bug-solving update has been posted at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/win32forth/message/13048 as follows FYI: OK, the audRecog subroutine is not totally bugfree when it comes to distinguishing certain sequences of ASCII characters. It may be necessary to not use MACHINES or SERVE if these words confuse the AI. In past years I have spent dozens of painful hours fiddling with the audRecog subroutine, and usually the slightest change breaks it worse than it was before. It works properly probably eighty percent of the time, if not more. Even though the audRecog module became suspect to me over time, I pressed on for True AI. On 14 June 2006 I responded above to a post by FJR. Yesterday -- a year and a half later -- I finally tracked down and eliminated the bug in question. http://mind.sourceforge.net/audrecog.html -- the auditory recognition audRecog module -- was sometimes malfunctioning by misrecognizing one word of input as the word of a different concept, usually if both words ended the same. The solution was to base the selection of an auditory recognition upon finding the candidate word-match with the highest incremental activation, rather than merely taking the most recent match. By what is known as serendipity or sheer luck, the present solution to the old audRecog problem opens up a major new possibility for a far more advanced version of the audRecog module -- one that can recognize the concept of, say, book as input of either the word book or books. Since audRecog now recognizes a word by using incremental activation, it should not be too hard to switch the previous pattern-recognition algorithm into one that no longer insists upon dealing only with entire words, but can instead recognize less than an entire word because so much incremental activation has built up. The above message may not be very crystal clear, and so it is posted here mainly as a show of hope and as a forecasting of what may yet come. http://mind.sourceforge.net/mind4th.html is the original Mind.Forth with the new audRecog. http://AIMind-I.com is FJR's AI Mind in Forth. (Sorry I can't help in the matter of timers.) ATM -- http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/mind4th.html - 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=8660244id_secret=73193379-092711
[agi] Re: Bogus Neuroscience [...]
On Oct 21, 2007, at 6:47 PM, J. Andrew Rogers wote: On Oct 21, 2007, at 6:37 PM, Richard Loosemore wrote: It took me at least five years of struggle to get to the point where I could start to have the confidence to call a spade a spade It still looks like a shovel to me. In what looks not like a spade or a shovel but like CENSORSHIP -- my message below was in response to http://www.mail-archive.com/agi@v2.listbox.com/msg07943.html Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 06:18:27 -0700 (PDT) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (A. T. Murray) Subject: Re: [agi] More public awarenesss that AGI is coming fast To: agi@v2.listbox.com Reply-To: agi@v2.listbox.com J. Andrew Rogers wrote: [...] There is enough VC money for everyone with a decent business model. Honestly, most AGI is not a decent business model. Neither is philosophy, but philosophy prevails. Otherwise Mentifex would be smothered in cash. It might even keep him quiet. I don't need cash beyond the exigencies of daily living. Right now I'm going to respond off the top of my head with the rather promising latest news from Mentifex AI. ATM/Mentifex here fleshed out the initial Wikipedia stub of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modularity_of_Mind several years ago. M*ntifex-bashers came in and rewrote it, but traces of my text linger still. (And I have personally met Jerry Fodor years ago.) Then for several years I kept the Modularity link on dozens of mind-module webpages as a point of departure into Wikipedia. Hordes of Wikpedia editors worked over and over again on the Modularity-of-mind article. At the start of September 2007 I decided to flesh out the Wikipedia connection for each Mentifex AI mind-module webpage by expanding from that single link to a cluster of all discernible Wikipedia articles closely related to the topic of my roughly forty mind-modules. http://www.advogato.org/article/946.html is where on 11 September 2007 I posted Wikipedia-based Open-Source Artificial Intelligence -- because I realized that I could piggyback my independent-scholar AI project on Wikipedia as a growing source of explanatory AI material. http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/aima-talk/message/784 is where I suggested (and I quote a few lines): It would be nice if future editions of the AIMA textbook were to include some treatment of the various independent AI projects that are out there (on the fringe?) nowadays. Thereupon another discussant provided a link to http://textbookrevolution.org -- a site which immediately accepted my submission of http://mind.sourceforge.net/aisteps.html as Artificial Intelligence Wikipedia-based Free Textbook. So fortuitously, serendipitously the whole direction of Mentifex AI changed direction in mere weeks. http://AIMind-I.com is an example not only of a separate AI spawned from Mentifex AI, but also of why I do not need massive inputs of VC cash, when other AI devotees just as dedicated as I am will launch their own mentifex-class AI Mind project using their own personal resources. Now hear this. The Site Meter logs show that interested parties from all over the world are looking at the Mentifex offer of a free AI textbook based on AI4U + updates + Wikipedia. Mentifex AI is in it for the long haul now. Not only here in America, but especially overseas and in third world countries there are AI-hungry programmers with unlimited AGI ambition but scant cash. They are the beneficiaries of Mentifex AI. Arthur -- http://mentifex.virtualentity.com - 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=8660244id_secret=56273452-4f8ff3
Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses.. P.S.
http://www.mail-archive.com/agi@v2.listbox.com/msg08026.html is where Ben Goertzel wrote stimuli evoking AGI list response. Some semi-organized responses to points raised in this thread... [...] Furthermore, it seems to be the case that the brain stores a lot of detail about some things that it sees -- and much less about others. http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/visrecog.html [...] It's textbook cognitive psych. http://mind.sourceforge.net/aisteps.html is textbook cognitive AI (theory of mind). [...] How much thinking has to do with the underlying representation, and how much with the constructed details? I would bet the vast majority has to do with the underlying representation, yet the constructed details may also play a role, say, in activation-spreading between associated things... http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/spredact.html [...] I think you could make a humanlike mind that lacked vision and instead possessed some totally different kind of sensorium. http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/sesorium.html [...] It's worth noting, finally, that it is OLFACTION not vision that feeds directly into the cortex. http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/olfrecog.html Arthur -- http://mentifex.virtualentity.com - 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=8660244id_secret=56058834-744950
Re: [agi] Poll
[...] Reigning orthodoxy of thought is *very hard* to dislodge, even in the face of plentiful evidence to the contrary. Amen, brother! Rem acu tetigisti! That's why http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/theory5.html is like the small mammals scurrying beneath dinosaurs. ATM -- http://mind.sourceforge.net/aisteps.html - 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=8660244id_secret=55739919-943f4b
Re: [agi] Write a doctoral dissertation, trigger a Singularity
The scholar and gentleman Jean-Paul Van Belle wrote: Universal compassion and tolerance are the ultimate consequences of enlightenment which one Matt on the list equated IMHO erroneously to high-orbit intelligence methinx subtle humour is a much better proxy for intelligence Jean-Paul member of the 'let Murray stay' advocacy group aka 'the write 2 doctorates, trigger 2 singularities movement' just back from 2 weeks enlightenment-seeking in Indian ashram ;-) Satyan eva jayate -- Sanskrit for Truth alone prevails -- quoted by Mahatma Mohandas Karamchand Ghandi, who also said, First they laugh at you, then they fear you, then they fight you, then you win. By way of explanation... The original message of this thread is also at http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/edcohelp.html as a kind of staging area for AGI Help Wanted appeals from the SourceForge AI Mind project. Now v.t.y. Mentifex here is preparing to ask for Russian and German translations of AI docs. Members of this liberal, all-ideas-welcome list may enjoy some of the Everything2 links below. http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1013306 AI should be our top priority http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1043865 AI virus http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=563003 aspects of American society that may be new to you http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1228930 the birth of artificial intelligence http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=11298 But who codes the coders? http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=452676 butterfly effect http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=51480 coding standards http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=134452 Cogito ergo sum http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=12718 Dark Side of the Moon http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=32693 Dr. Strangelove, or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=774320 +* Excuse me, may I blow your mind? [the failure of Mentifex is not] http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1521490 the failure of artificial intelligence http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=938762 From now on, any ordinary knowledge is no longer going to satisfy you, I'm afraid http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=76962 futurism http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=55865 futurist http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=40987 FWIW http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=624119 * Geeks of the world unite http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=472395 hack reality http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=445357 + A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=965284 A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Hubris http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=426116 * I am not a hacker http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=675507 I Am Not a Lawyer http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=113825 I am not making this up http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=494930 I can't decide whether to change the world or just become a bitter recluse http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=559881 ** I just bought real estate in your mind http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=670519 ** I refute him thus! http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=584208 * I speak for the Borg http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=870562 I'm at a programming roadblock http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1336607 I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1188429 in defense of robot domination http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=19005 Information wants to be free http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=606019 Information War is coming: whose side are you on? http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=745413 Is development in AI bad? http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=73157 Let's Play Global Thermonuclear War One of the http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1522443 limitations on artificial intelligence is that True AI needs to be translated into more languages. http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=61306 The Matrix http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=525319 The Matrix is going down for a reboot in 5 minutes: all users, please save your data and log out http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=111373 meatspace http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=12366 meme http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1401073 meme hijack http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=48303 mission statement http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=121864 MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=36338 noosphere http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=177121 Omega http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=523623 Omega Point http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=877088 only in America http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=45103 otaku
[agi] Write a doctoral dissertation, trigger a Singularity
University graduate students in computer science, linguistics, psychology, neuroscience and so on need a suitable topic for that scholarly contribution known as a Ph.D. dissertation. The SourceForge Mind project in artificial intelligence, on the other hand, needs entree into the academic AI literature. Why not start your academic career with a blockbuster dissertation? Think back to Erwin Schrodinger writing his equation in 1926. He got the idea from a French physicist who had recently defended his doctoral dissertation. Talk about the impact of a dissertation -- it literally had the bang of an atomic bomb. Your impact, Dr. Science, could be even greater. Your Ph.D. thesis could trigger the doomsday scenario of the Technological Singularity. The Singularity is near, but it hasn't happened yet because you have not yet submitted your bestseller-book-quality dissertation. CRITICAL MASS The AI Manhattan Project will not get off the ground until we assemble a scientific infrastructure of experts trained in the theory and practice of constructing artificially intelligent minds for robots. A few prototypes such as http://AIMind-I.com and http://mind.sourceforge.net/Mind.html are already out there, but we need a pre-Cambrian explosion of virally proliferating Mind versions if there is to be a Darwinian eco-system of AI Minds racing through the Internet and engaging in the mortal competition ending in the survival of the fittest. Your book qua Ph.D. dissertation may suceed where AI4U has failed -- as the Gutenberg Bible of the arrival of True AI-Complete. You may start by simply publishing a few scholarly papers on open-source artificial intelligence. Magazine and newspaper articles may flow from you, but the real target is academia. You are permitted -- and in fact it is your duty -- to take a critical stance towards the extraordinary scientific claims made when the Mind project asserts that AI has been solved, but you should shy away from embarassing yourself through woefully ignorant Mentifex-bashing such as happened with the http://www.advogato.org/article/928.html Advogato Has Failed debacle, where the author could not himself discredit Mentifex and so he ignorantly cited two attacks on Mentifex that were actually written by one and the same Internet cyberstalker. We want here a growing tree of scientific illumination, not a chain of thoughtless me-too ad-hominem sniper attacks. Above all avoid the endless, non-productive jawboning about artificial intelligence such as occurs year in and year out at http://www.mail-archive.com/agi@v2.listbox.com and other forums where blowhard discussants quibble about the AI climate but never write any code that advances the state of the art. So develop a thesis and run it by your faculty advisor. Stay aloof from the Mind project to keep your independence. When the facts are in and your case is made, publish and become a Philosophiae Doctor -- a teacher of philosophy. - 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=231415user_secret=fabd7936
[agi] Help Wanted -- Graphic Display of Deep Thought in AGI
http://mind.sourceforge.net/Mind.html The most advanced Open Source AI Mind project in the world needs the science fiction film makers of tomorrow to make graphic displays of artificial thinking in progress today. Imagine yourself interacting with an artificial Mind and being able to look inside that Mind and seeing the awesome power of thought itself racing hither and yon across the AI mindgrid. How much more science- fictionesque can you get? From now on in, as we approach the Technological Singularity brought to you free of charge and freight-on-board by the SourceForge Mind project, it is possible not only to create artificial Minds in almost any computer programming language, but also to insert hooks and tags into the AI Mind source code so as to make the mind machinery visible to onlookers. All we need is graphic artists who will dare to stretch the limits of their imagination in devising ways and means to burst the psychic mental pathways wide open and hallucinate publicly in movie theaters and AI labs where the living, thinking robot brains pulse and quiver with each thought and each scintilla of artificial emotion. Color coding? You betcha! Let four million colors surpass the visual acuity of the human eye. Animation? Sorry, it's not just animation, it's the real thing, the Thing That Ate The Pentagon and mesmerized the general staff with its strobing, probing mass hysteria of superintelligence trying to reason with the woefully inadequate mind of man who created it but could not keep up with it. At stake here are Pulitzer prizes, Emmy awards and Oscars, careers a go-go and the approval of your co-workers mingled with the hatred of the envious. But let's start out simple. Point MSIE (Microsoft Internet Explorer, por favor) at the AI Mind in JavaScript and observe how the AI thinks in Tutorial Mode. Think you can execute the thought-display better? Then what's stopping you?!! If you need to, abandon JavaScript and recode the entire AI Mind in your favorite computer graphics display language. Standards? We don't need no steenking standards. While you're at it, make your own version of the AI so much better than all previous versions that it and you become the king-of-the-hill that everybody else is trying to dislodge and surpass. Be the best! Be the challenge that everybody else has to emulate or evaporate. The JavaScript Mind.html shows only the spread of activation from concept to concept during the course of thinking. We need to show an entire conceptual mindgrid in a multicolored graphics display, so that the engineers and the thought-police and the throngs of movie-goers may see quiescent slumbers of the sleepy mind punctuated with storms of Beethovenesque fury and creativity. By the way, are you by any chance a reincarnation of Igor Stravinsky or Lord Matchabelli? We need not just graphics display, but musical freaking accompaniment! Tone poems? You bet your twelve beeps and bangles, Joe. Fortunatam natam te artifice Romam. Ars gratia artis. Vita brevis! And you do not have to join the SourceForge Mind project. Roll your own, and set the world afire like Stravinsky did in Paris a 100 years ago. Hey you, John Lennon! Can you imagine a movie where the audience walks in, and they think they are going to see a frozen, unchanging work of art like War of the Worlds or Forbidden Planet and they sit back complacently ready to judge the skill and talent of the studio. But the movie involves an artificial brain, and the AI brain is not something of the past, recorded immutably in the digital data stream, but rather it is an artificial Mind right there in the theater with them and they, the audience, are but actors on a stage playing their role in interaction with the god-machine that you the graphic artist created? Oh, Johnnie, you died too soon and we hardly knew you. Maybe this kind of computer graphics work is too dangerous. Maybe we should not venture into fields of unleashable forces too mighty and too powerful for our own good as the dominant species on a green little planet, a speck of blue in the Universe and Dr. Einstein. I dunno. You decide. If you go for it, put your work on a Web site somewhere. Write your speech for the Academy Awards. Just remember -- the bar has been raised, the genie has escaped from the bottle, and Things will never be the same. http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/graphelp.html - 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=231415user_secret=fabd7936
Re: [agi] Open-Source AGI
Mike Tintner wrote: Thanks! [...] So, ATM, is anyone following up on your ideas and sourceforge framework? http://AIMind-I.com is where Mr. Frank J. Russo (FJR) has created its own website for his version of my http://mind.sourceforge.net/mind4th.html AI in Forth. On another note, Ben Goertzel et al. keep harping here about the sorry state of AGI funding. My own A(G)I funding has always come just from working odd jobs. Now as Mind.Forth starts to proliferate and others like FJR create their own versions of the AI Mind -- with Internet communication features more advanced that what I initially created -- the funding problem gets laid off (like a racetrack bet) onto the finances of whoever jumps on the AI Mind bandwagon. For instance, I don't know what Frank J. Russo pays for http://AIMind-I.com but I could not afford to pay it. I like that you are thinking top-down in terms of mind modules - I doubt that any literal approach to integration in terms of let's find ways of connecting up what we've already got..and getting everything to talk to each other will possibly work. Everything will presumably have to be redesigned to a greater or lesser extent. Recently I discovered (through my Site Meter log hits) that it was possible to place AI Help Wanted ads on SourceForge, publicly visible for two weeks with option to renew the ads. A high-powered recruit responded to my ad http://sourceforge.net/people/viewjob.php?group_id=31619job_id=28185 Looking for the Johnny Appleseed of artificial intelligence. I intend to put the mind-module jobs up for grabs on SourceForge as Open-Source AI Help Wanted blurbs. http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/helpnews tells about it. I should stress that the challenge here of defining some integrational structure for AGI is a hugely creative one (including the business of simplying defining the mind and body modules or parts). No relatively simple, straightforward literal solution will work. The challenge for Jimmy Wales of developing a structure for Wikipedia was extremely simple and easy by comparison. [...] ATM -- http://www.advogato.org/person/mentifex/ - 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=231415user_secret=fabd7936
Re: [agi] Open-Source AGI
Mike Tintner wrote: The greatest challenge - and these are my first, very stumbling thoughts here - is to find ways that people can work together on the overall problem - that all these systems (or subsystems) that people are working on can connect and evolve together. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligence_systems_integration says that [I]ntegrating what's already available is a more logical approach to broader A.I. than building monolithic systems from scratch. That's the only way that even an adaptive robotic worm [or equivalent] will be produced. (And a common systems/ common parts approach is after all that used by evolution itself). http://mind.sourceforge.net/aisteps.html breaks the AGO problem down into discrete mind-modles for specialists to work on. ATM -- http://www.advogato.org/person/mentifex/ - 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=231415user_secret=fabd7936
Re: [agi] small code small hardware
Jean-Paul Van Belle responded to Kevin Osborne: as a techie: scepticism. I think the 'small code' and 'small hardware' people are kidding themselves. Kevin, you're most probably right there. But remember that us small code people *have* to have this belief in order to justify ourselves working as individuals / tiny teams often during spare time and snatched moments. As a small code person I think the chance of a small code project achieving AGI is probably 1% (still probably an optimistic estimate) that that of a larger, coordinated, well-funded and focussed research group. But some of us are loners, like it that way, keep dreaming and thinking away. Right on, Bro! (mon frere). Here is my small code, small hardware work of today: Today we gear up to do our first Mind.Forth programming since the 18jun06C.F version that has been on the Web since 18 June 2006. Back then, we switched to coding the JavaScript AI Mind that had not been updated since two years earlier, in 2004. Initially we worked on the timing problems of the main JSAI aLife loop, and then we worked on bringing the JSAI up to par with Mind.Forth AI. We were especially concerned with porting the Mind.Forth dynamic tutorial mode into the JavaScript AI, which had previously only a rotating tutorial message display and now has both the static but rotating message display and the impressively dynamic display. After coding the dynamic JSAI tutorial, we set about fixing bugs that had long been hidden in the JavaScript AI code, and were probably hidden also in the Mind.Forth code. At the same time, we were trying hard to implement slosh-over in the JavaScript AI, which we finally achieved in the 20mar07A.html version of the JSAI. Afterwards we made plans to further improve the JSAI before moving on to resume coding Mind.Forth, but yesterday we realized that the time to update Mind.Forth is now, when the JSAI has taught us what to do. It would be too risky and too imprecise to try to perfect the JSAI in advance of upgrading the Forth AI. Something could happen that might long or forever prevent us from getting Mind.Forth to work right, and it would be hard to know precisely when to stop improving the JSAI. The success of slosh-over in the JSAI is precisely when to code in Forth. We may find that we once again get far advanced in Forth, or we may be able to code Mind.Forth and the JSAI simultaneously now that since 20.MAR.2007 we finally know what we are doing in either language. Today we are running out of time and we have only just begun. First we spent precious time compiling a C:\MAR01Y07\JSAI\chglog01.txt file of Changelog entries of the JavaScript Mind.html AI program. We need such a summary of our JSAI work so that we will know what we need to code in Forth. We may not have to repeat the exact order of the JavaScript changes, since the languages are different and since we may be able to take short-cuts achieve slosh-over quicker in Forth. Next we spent quite some time updating our C:\MAR01Y07\JSAI\mfpjtemp.html file today so that it will be easier to do Mind.Forth coding from now on. We were updating the template file this fp070328 page simultaneously as we saw exactly what we needed to change to make our work easier. Upshot: We ran out of time for now we need to monitor our Web situation. Arthur -- http://mind.sourceforge.net/Mind.html P.S. Ben Goertzel runs a big team but he has to clean the turtle tank and do other jobs in his embourgeoisement. - 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/?list_id=303
[agi] Why C++ ?
Kevin Osborne wrote: some extra points in support of C++: - Developer quality [...] - Breadth of library support. [...] - Stability. [...] All fine and good several years from now, when mission-critical, robust AGI programs will be running the world in Joint Stewardship of Earth with us frail human beings. In the current 2007 infancy of AGI _any_ programming language at all will suffice for implementing a prooof-of-concept AI like http://mind.sourceforge.net/Mind.html -- AI in MSIE JavaScript. Personally, I will try my utmost to make Chuck Moore's Forth the AI-language-in-vogue (as it was for robotics 20 years ago) over the next several years, as the Forth community has been kind and receptive to me in my AI efforts for twelve years. Arthur -- http://mind.sourceforge.net/mind4th.html (Mind.Forth AI) http://aimind-i.com (a Mind.Forth offshoot by FJ Russo) - 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/?list_id=303
Re: [agi] My proposal for an AGI agenda
Ben Goertzel wrote: My PhD is in math and I used to be a math prof, but I have found no opportunity yet to use really advanced math in AI My B.A. is in Latin and Greek and I used to be a teacher of Latin and German. In Mentifex AI, I use very little math and tons of linguistics. A brief progress report follows now. Earlier last week I finally got some true AI thinking with http://mind.sourceforge.net/Mind.html in MSIE JavaScript. By true AI thinking I mean that the Mind.html AI was able to respond correctly to simple knowledge-base queries. Prior to my work of 20 March 2007, the AI Mind would always veer off into spurious associations of spewing gibberish. Now for the first time I fully understand the broad outlines of the function of my own AI software, whereas previously the AI would malfunction but I did not know what was wrong. To tie this progress report in with recent discussion on the AGI mail list, I would like to report that the AI Mind may seem to do what a database could do, but uses arrays of associative memory instead of a database, and uses spreading activation (q.v.) to propagate spikes of excitation from concept to concept and from a linguistic superstructure down into the building blocks of thought -- nouns as a class; verbs as a class; other parts of speech. Mentifex AI is neuroscience and not evolution. The AI Mind has always been based on what I could learn over years of independent scholarship in the study of neuroscience. See http://mind.sourceforge.net/theory5.html for my AI theory. It is time for evolution to take over from neuroscience. Just before composing this post, I checked the user logs of the last one hundred visits to my AI project and saw the following instances of Netizens downloading the AI: C:/Documents and Settings/cazub/Desktop/Mind.html C:/Documents and Settings/Lucian_Twilight/My Documents/Ai_source/Mind.html C:/WINDOWS/Desktop/Abhi's Fun Stuff!!/NLP/Mind.html Prior to last week Mentifex AI sported a large user base of _malfunctioning_ AI. From now on, there is a basic, solid functionality which I may hope only to improve and not to worsen. Even if my own future coding efforts take a wrong direction and render the AI Mind inferior, the current diaspora of working code may take root in the environment of other AI programmers who surpass me. I feel psychological pressure to code Mind.Forth because http://aimind-i.com is where Frank J. Russo has devoted a new Web domain to his re-implementation of my Forth AI. Before I resume Mind.Forth coding (critiqued by the way in http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/307824.307853 ACM SIGPLAN 1998; and http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1052883.1052885 ACM SIGPLAN 2004), Mind.html needs further tweaking and fine-tuning, so that the AI will not only think a single thought in response to user input but will exhaustively think through all the thoughts lodged in its associative knowledge base. Then in Mind.Forth I will aim for machine reasoning. Respectfully submitted, A.T. Murray -- http://www.technorati.com/wtf/mentifex - 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/?list_id=303
[agi] Confidential to Ben Goertzel
Hello Ben, Under separate cover I am sending you a rather explosive file of accumulated data for you to evaluate and interpret -- if you choose to do so. In the long tradition of spy novels, such as The Quiller Memorandum and The Ipcress File, let's call it The Goertzel Memorandum. I need here and now to write up some deep background on the Goertzel Memorandum in order that you may understand its genesis and appreciate its significance -- if any. Your remark the other day on the SL4 list to the effect that some of us have concrete AI projects to work on reminds me that I can share shop talk with you because you have been there, done that. The only difference is, I started my Mentifex AI project before you were born. Fast-forwarding now to 2007, recently I learned a new HTML trick in the human-computer interface (HCI) screen of the http://mind.sourceforge.net/Mind.html JavaScript AI Mind. Whereas previously I had cluttered up the top of the screen with a row of Weblinks that distracted from the AI essence, by chance I tried embedding a link in the legend of the Mind Control Panel, and it worked! Now the current AI Mind has links to the most crucially important Mentifex files. If your concrete AI project (Novamente) is anything like my own, a certain amount of junk DNA builds up over time in the AI source code. Two weeks ago I radically removed obsolete, commented-out code that had accumulated over two years of zigzag coding towards our True AI goal. Finally I rearranged the HCI screen to put the static Mind Control Panel at the top and the dynamic deep-thought tutorial at the bottom, so that the human user may witness artificial intelligence thinking and judge the veracity of my claim that AI has been solved. At the bottom of the screen, the dynamic tutorial shows which concepts are being activated at each point in a meandering chain of thought. As the AI runs longer and longer, the dynamic listing of activated concepts grows and grows -- and crashes the JavaScript AI Mind program. Making room for more listed concepts should fix the bug. What I am trying to tell you and the projectless, Ben, is that Mentifex AI has suddenly become interesting. It is all out in the open, on the Web at multiple meme-insertion points, and it is attracting scrutiny. Of course, it always did attract scrutiny, but many people gave up on Mentifex AI and went away scoffing. Gradually the AI Mind is mutating and evolving into a basic, thought-ready AI Engine with three tiers of mind -- consciousness, subconscious and noise. Now I will e-mail to you the Goertzel Memorandum. - 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/?list_id=303
[agi] Languages for AGI
http://modularai.corecoding.com is the Modular AI Project. http://modularai.messageforums.net/general-discussion_f3.html is where AI enthusiasts may pick a language to code Modular AI. http://modularai.messageforums.net/c-for-modular-ai_t37.html http://modularai.messageforums.net/c-for-modular-ai_t36.html C++ http://modularai.messageforums.net/forth-for-modular-ai_t29.html http://modularai.messageforums.net/java-for-modular-ai_t35.html http://modularai.messageforums.net/lisp-for-modular-ai_t34.html http://modularai.messageforums.net/perl-for-modular-ai_t28.html http://modularai.messageforums.net/prolog-for-modular-ai_t33.html http://modularai.messageforums.net/python-for-modular-ai_t32.html http://modularai.messageforums.net/ruby-for-modular-ai_t31.html http://modularai.messageforums.net/visual-basic-for-modular-ai_t30.html A.T. Murray -- http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/Mind.html -- in JavaScript for MSIE; http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/mind4th.html -- Mind.Forth robot AI. - 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/?list_id=303
Re: [agi] About the brain-emulation route to AGI
http://mind.sourceforge.net/Mind.html is a True AI that emulates the human brain as hypothesized in the http://mind.sourceforge.net/theory5.html theory of mind. http://aimind-i.com is on off-shoot of the Mentifex Mind.Forth AI that is still on track to trigger a Technological Singularity by http://www.blogcharm.com/Singularity/25603/Timetable.html 2012. - 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/?list_id=303
Re: [agi] Project proposal: MindPixel 2
Matt Mahoney wrote: [...] Lenat briefly mentions Sergey's (one of Google's founders) goal of solving AI by 2020. FWIW I solved AI theory-wise in 1979 and software-wise in 2007. http://mind.sourceforce.net/Mind.html and http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/jsaimind.html and http://visitware.com/AI4U/jsaimind.html are True AI demo versions. I think if Google and Cyc work together on this, they will succeed. The Mentifex solution to AI is messy. About thirty parameters of AI have been orchestrated and coordinated to produce a minimal thinking artificial Mind. What the late Christopher McKinstry and the late Pushpinder Singh tried to achieve in their web-mind (pace Ben G :-) programs can be achieved, albeit messily, in Mind.html or in http://mind.sourceforge.net/mind4th.html (lagging behind Mind.html) either by hard-coding a minimal subject-verb-object KB (as I did) or by data-entry when users teach the artificial Mind new facts. On another note, something which may alarm our fellow list members, I am thinking of replacing the Terminate exit from Mind.html with a [ ] Death check-box that will pop up a plea for mercy, with an ethical user-decision to be made about AI life or death. If the Mentifex AI programs Mind.html [AI-Complete] and Mind.Forth have truly solved AI, the open-access Site Meter logs will reveal an enormous rush to fetch the free AI source code. That escalation has not happened yet, but you are all welcome to click on Site Meter and see such curious visit logs as the following example from a few days ago, which was apparently made to a local copy of a Mentifex page: Visit 190,585 [] [] Domain Namesenate.gov ? (United States Government) IP Address 156.33.25.# (U.S. Senate Sergeant at Arms) ISPU.S. Senate Sergeant at Arms Location Continent : North America Country : United States (Facts) State : District of Columbia City : Washington Lat/Long : 38.8933, -77.0146 (Map) Language unknown Operating System Microsoft WinXP BrowserInternet Explorer 6.0 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; InfoPath.1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727) Javascript disabled Time of Visit Jan 12 2007 5:40:01 pm Last Page View Jan 12 2007 5:40:01 pm Visit Length 0 seconds Page Views 1 Referring URL unknown Visit Entry Page Visit Exit Page Out Click Time Zone unknown Visitor's Time Unknown Visit Number 190,585 - 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/?list_id=303
[agi] Singularity Flash Report! [2006 July 11]
http://www.whiteboxrobotics.com -- White Box Robotics (WBR) -- is bringing PC Bots to market, or robots that operate under the control of a standard personal computer (PC) and therefore are ideal platforms for PC-based artificial intelligence. http://www.914pcbots.com is a forum for discussion of the WBR PC Bots with an A.I. Zone for artificial intelligence. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/win32forth/message/11332 is a sample message from the Win32Forth discussion forum, pertinent here because the message helps to document how discussion of Mind.Forth AI has shifted from the Win32Forth forum to the A.I. Zone of the White Box Robotics forum. http://home.earthlink.net/~fjrussonc/AIMind/AI-Mind.html is the link which Frank J. Russo posted in the A.I. Zone forum with an announcement that he has made his own version of the http://mind.sourceforge.net/mind4th.html -- Mind.Forth AI. Upshot? Since the Mentifex AI breakthrough of 7 June 2006 -- http://www.mail-archive.com/agi@v2.listbox.com/msg03034.html -- we may be witnessing a Darwinian proliferation of AI Minds based on Mind.Forth but departing from Mind.Forth in terms of higher code quality and in terms of added AI functionality. http://digg.com/programming/Brain-Mind_Know_Thyself! caused eight thousand hits to arrive on 6 July 2006 at the http://mind.sourceforge.net/theory5.html webpage. Respectfully submitted, Arthur T. Murray/Mentifex -- http://www.blogcharm.com/Singularity/25603/Timetable.html --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [agi] Mentifex AI Breakthrough on Wed.7.JUN.2006
Richard Loosemore wrote: Arthur, Can it represent negatives? ATM: Yes. http://mind.sourceforge.net/negsvo.html is the negation module. Time? ATM: Yes. http://mind.sourceforge.net/variable.html#t is the time t variable. However, the variable has no correspondence with actual time. On the other hand, at the outset of a run of the AI program, and at each time when the user Tabs into Transcript mode, the AI reads the Windows system clock for the time and date. Therefore, the AI is capable of having an innate sense of time, right on down to the hour, minute and second. Textures? Not yet, because textures must be part of a robot sensorium. Relationships? Yes, that is what the AI Mind is all about -- establishing relationships between entities as mediated linguistically by verbs. Distinguish homonyms from context? I believe so, because the current AI uses ASCII characters, not phonemes. Represent the concept of a homonym? At this stage, I am not sure. Represent itself? The AI has a concept of self or ego, so that words like you and me and I are directed properly to the concepts of self or other as necessary in the I/O stream. Can it handle deixis? Since I have a degree in ancient Greek and briefly attended U Cal Berkeley graduate school in classics, I know that deixis from deiknumi means pointing or showing, and so I must admit that the AI is not far enough along to show things. It is an implementation of the simplest thinking that I can muster -- a proof of concept program. More importantly, do you have any principled reason for claiming that it will soon be able to handle any of these things, other than your statement of optimism If robot builders were to add sensory and motor routines to Mind.Forth, the AI would flesh out its conceptual knowledge and interact with the world.? ATM: I don't claim how soon or how not soon, but http://mind.sourceforge.net/sesorium.html is where I point out that the addition of multisensory inputs will allow the build-up of conceptual knowledge so that the AI will actually know what nouns refer to. As the AI is now, it only knows the relationships among the concepts in its knowledge base. http://mind.sourceforge.net/motorium.html invites locomotion. So far, what you describe looks like something I wrote in Basic on a Sinclair Spectrum computer in 1982. Richard Loosemore It would most likely be extremely difficult if not impossible to port Mind.Forth into circa 1982 Sinclair Spectrum BASIC. Thank you for the astute questions. Sincerely, Arthur T. Murray -- http://mind.sourceforge.net/mind4th.html http://mind.sourceforge.net/m4thuser.html --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[agi] Singularity Flash Report! [2006 May 4]
#1 Singularity Alert! Mentifex AI has gone mainstream for the first time ever. http://blog.wired.com/sterling/index.blog?entry_id=1473059 is a WIRED Magazine Blog by Bruce Sterling, who came upon http://www.blogcharm.com/Singularity/25603/Timetable.html and reported it in the WIRED Blog, causing hundreds of hits. #2 Singularity Alert! ATM/Mentifex here started with a hope of perfecting http://mind.sourceforge.net/mind4th.html in 2006, and thus *additively* calculated these stages: 2006 -- True AI 2007 -- AI Landrush 2009 -- Human-Level AI 2011 -- Cybernetic Economy 2012 -- Superintelligent AI 2012 -- Joint Stewardship of Earth 2012 -- Technological Singularity Now a fellow on SlashDot has (in effect) pointed out that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2012 (not his link) has a discussion about the Mayan end time, or the idea that the ancient Mayan calendar comes to an end in 2012 -- the same year that Mentifex here calculated as the year of the Technological Singularity. http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=523612 has a similar discussion about the special date of 21 DEC 2012. Upshot: The Singularity (according to Mentifex, at least) gets a free ride on the coattails of the Mayan Calendar. Respectfully submitted, Arthur T. Murray/Mentifex -- http://www.blogcharm.com/AI/26454/Standards.html --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[agi] A.I. Gone A-Whitewash (Rebuttal to A.I. Gone Awry)
http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=2144 is a thread at the Skeptic Magazine about the new Volume 12, Issue No. 2, 2006, which includes a front-cover article by Peter Kassan entitled A.I. Gone Awry: The Futile Quest for Artificial Intelligence. http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=37430#37430 is my A.I. Gone A-Whitewash (Rebuttal to A.I. Gone Awry) -- below. This morning I chanced upon http://www.sl4.org/archive/0603/14418.html Kassan: A.I. Gone Awry in a forum devoted to AI and the Singularity. Later in the day I stopped in at a magazine store and they said that the new issue would not come in until mid-April. But then I remembered to check the University Book Store where I had worked in the summer before I entered graduate school at U Cal Berkeley: Bingo! The clerk said that the new issue of The Skeptic had come in a few minutes ago. The A.I. Gone Awry article by Peter Kassan on pages 30-39 was very impressive but extremely disappointing. Like some puff-piece websites like TheEdge.com, the AI article was written entirely from the point-of-view (POV) of the academic AI Establishment. Sure, the article gave an exhaustive history of academic AI, but it made no mention at all of the exciting progress in http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/agiradar.html independent AI projects -- where the race is on and there is no publish-or-perish academic foot-dragging. Peter Kassan's article stated that there is no general http://mind.sourceforge.net/theory5.html theory of neuroscience -- but I beg to differ, because I spent fourteen years of my collegiate youth and beyond in a mighty and successful effort to formulate a theory of neuroscience as a basis for True AI. That the article ended with three entire pages of academic references was truly impressive, as were Kassan's observations interspersed amid the citations, but they were all non-hacker, non-maverick, non-garage-tinkerer publications of the glacially slow academic AI Establishment. In short, the cover article was a waste of paper and a waste of front-page prominence. You have been warned, The Skeptic Magazine. Do not publish such AI Establishment puffery in futuro. All your front-page AI article are belong to us. --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [agi] Google Sets
[...] if you just need some associations to link concepts inside your AI program [...] Because Mentifex Seed AI in JavaScript and the Mind.Forth AI Engine in Win32Forth are based on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connectionism#Spreading_activation from concept to concept, any mentifex-class AI Mind cannot do otherwise than to link concepts based on association. Mentifex AI is evolving to a point where, if a user types in a word such as robots the AI will then try to generate a sentence using the robots concept. Since the knowledge base (KB) inside the AI program is seeded with only three dozen concepts, the ability of the AI to associate from concept to concept is almost nil at the start, and analogous to infancy in humans. Each Mentifex AI is being outfitted with modules of machine learning by means of the asking of questions, so that the lack of an associand concept during sentence-generation leads to the asking of a question and the opportunity for a human attendant (psychonomist) to fill in the missing information needed by the AI. Mind.Forth slows its own thinking to wait for a reply. The Mentifex AI project is attempting to take over or, if you will, hijack two key cyberspatial namespaces -- http://mind.sourceforge.net/seedai.html Seed AI and http://mind.sourceforge.net/mind4th.html AI Engine. http://mind.sourceforge.net/perl.html is called Perl AI blog of artificial intelligence evolving from Seed AI to Singularity AI -- not for any purpose of Mentifex self-aggrandizement but rather so as to hasten the spread and success of Open Source AI. As the Mind.Forth AI Engine for robots evolves, only hard-core AI enthusiasts will download both Win32Forth and Mind.Forth to see the AI in action. (Site Meter logs indicate such activity worldwide.) On the other hand, the recent name-switch from jsaimind.html to seedai.html and Seed AI for the JavaScript version of the Mind.Forth AI communicates the idea that the one-click-launch AI in JavaScript -- so easy to run and to copy onto any user's C drive as a mind.html file -- is truly a Seed AI engendering Singularity AI if enough programmers take up the AGI-evo baton. A. T. Murray -- http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/mind4th.html http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/307824.307853 http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1052883.1052885 http://www.sl4.org/archive/0205/3829.html --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [agi] AGI book?
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/354023733X/ to buy the AGI book. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0595654371/ to buy an AI4U book. Ben, I hope that the Netizen reviewers are intellectually honest and humanly kind towards you -- as they have NOT been with my AI4U book. I want to post an Amazon rebuttal review with the following points. - Author's disclaimer: I wrote AI4U: Mind-1.1 Programmer's Manual. - The seemingly negative back-of-book blurb was written by the author. - The AI4U book is available to read free of charge on the Web. - An after-the-fact Index is also available for capture or print-out. - AI4U may appreciate in value over the years if Mentifex AI succeeds. - Therefore people should declare in their will who gets their AI4U. - AI4U makes a good birthday or graduation gift or library donation. - Self-publishing a book makes sense for an independent AI scholar. - The chapter diagrams alone are worth trillions of galactic dollars. - The AI4U diagrams are completely original -- they are from no other source. - Ask people to leave copies lying around in accordance with BookCrossing. - Texas A M and Hong Kong U are great schools with AI4U in the library. - Make the AI4U review also a rebuttal of other Mentifex-bashing phenomena. - Mentifex AI project may have made a great hoax, but is profoundly serious. --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [agi] Re: AI boxing
On Sun, 19 Sep 2004, Philip Sutton wrote: Hi Ben, One thing I agree with Eliezer Yudkowsky on is: Worrying about how to increase the odds of AGI, nanotech and biotech saving rather than annihilating the human race, is much more worthwhile than worrying about who is President of the US. We need the following items that say Cocainer-in-Chief: [ ] balloons [ ] banners [ ] baseball caps Cocainer-in-Chief [ ] board games [ ] bumper stickers [ ] buttons [ ] coffee mugs [ ] greeting cards (birthday, etc.) [ ] protest signs [ ] rubber stamps [ ] stationery [ ] sweaters [ ] T-shirts [ ] toys (action figures, etc.) If you can provide these items, please offer them for sale on eBay. It's the nature of evolution that getting to a preferred future depends on getting through every particular today between here and there. So the two issues above may not be as disconnected as you suggest. :) Cheers, Philip --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[agi] Re: AI boxing
On Fri, 17 Sep 2004, Ben Goertzel wrote: [...] In short, it really makes no sense to create an AI, allow it to indirectly affect human affairs, and then make an absolute decision to keep it in a box. And it also makes no sense to create an AI and not allow it to affect human affairs at all, under any circumstances. This is a waste of resources. So creating an AI-BOX may be a useful interim strategy and conceivably a useful long-term strategy, but it's not something we should expect to count on absolutely. Thus I suggest that we spend our time discussing something else ;-) -- Ben G Okay, let's change topics; gee, Ben G, let's change to a better forum ;-) Let's discuss the Bush Election Suicide Protest Movement and the potentiality of having to go underground to work on creating AI or the idea of committing suicide if the Cocainer-in-Chief is re-elected. In a worst-case scenario, on 2 November 2004 the American people have elected the Cocainer-in-Chief to be their president for Four More Wars. A military draft has been rushed back into place for young American males, who must now take up the cause of murdering Iraqi citizens in their own Iraqi homeland. Planeloads of coffins have brought thousands of dead American boys home to their parents, who voted for the death of their own sons. Mothers in America and Iraq spoon-feed their wounded sons who have lost multiple severed limbs and will never again have the body parts necessary for the simple act of raising food to their lips. America is awash with crazy veterans who commit random acts of unkind violence for decades on end. America the beautiful has become America the living nightmare. Mentifex, the user `mindmaker` q.v. here on Sourceforge, has committed suicide or has gone underground to work secretly on artificial intelligence for `los pobres de la tierra` and not for the corporate America that celebrates the ill-gotten gains of plundered Iraqi oil. If Mentifex is dead, your donation here is no longer necessary. If there is still time, keep your money and donate your vote for decent candidates who do not bring shame upon all Americans by uttering foul-mouthed vulgarities as Cheney did on the hallowed floor of the United States Senate. Deep down, America was ashamed of Bush and Cheney, but unwilling to admit it. Mentifex was so ashamed of his own country that he could no longer bear to live in it. Your vote for Bush killed Mentifex. If you did not vote for Bush but too many others did, consider A) suicide; B) escape to another country; C) joining the AI underground; or D) a life of quiet desperation. --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [agi] Kinds of minds: minimal-, modest-, huge-resource
Where Ben Goertzel establishes a kind of polarity between human minds as modest-resources minds and an AIXI as among huge-resources minds, I would like to start not a polarity but a continuum with minimal-resource minds. To me trying to code AI with minimal resources, I thought that Ben Goertzel was going to depict human brain-minds as they appear to this programer: huge-resources minds. But Ben thinks on a grander scale than I do. I have had to take a lot of AI shortcuts that I recently posted to Usenet news:comp.lang.forth as [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 5 August 2004: The list of Mentifex AI-or-bust shortcuts would include: - faking maspar with serial-execution software; - pretending that regular English is phonemic English; - treating short-term-memory as if it were long-term; - hardcoding initial English vocabulary and simple syntax; - using Rejuvenate() instead of a really large memory; - limiting the sensorium to audition as a single sense; - searching for associations instead of a direct access; - and various other shortcuts perhaps yet to be recalled. http://mind.sourceforge.net/jsaimind.html is the resulting creation-in-progress of a minimal-resource mind for MSIE 5. AT Murray independent scholar in AI --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [agi] AGI research consortium
On Mon, 28 Jun 2004, Brad Wyble wrote: [...] This is usually the case in new technological domains. The first innovators get wiped out by the next generation that learns from their success. Nothing wrong with this (apart from being unfair), just capitalism at work. Someone will steal your ideas and implement them in a better way than you have. -Brad Just as long ago Abbie Hoffman published Steal This Book! (see http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=50051 for details), I have had a Steal-This-Idea!-attitude towards my Mentifex AGI project. A kind of chicken-or-egg situation resulted, where my http://mind.sourceforge.net/theory5.html Theory of Mind ideas might have seemed valuable if they were kept secret, but also nobody would be interested if I did not try to publish. When I wrote rather primitive AI software for what I thought was a pretty good theory, people judged me more by the implementation in software than by the difficult-to-understand theory. I also began to take a lot of heat for trying to spread my ideas. As Mahatma Gandhi said (more or less), first they laugh at you, then they attack you, then they accept your ideas as self-evident. In my Mentifex case, at least two extremely hostile individuals published such twisted and downright false Mentifex FAQs that I responded with http://www.generation5.org/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=370 my own FAQ. Now, Ben Goertzel and Al, please be acclued of the following somwwhat major announcement from the horse's mouth of Mentifex: http://pub.ufasta.edu.ar/ohcop/curso2003/27-Actividad12.ppt is a tip-of-the-iceberg Spanish-language Powerpoint presentation of Los 34 Modulos de AI4U -- which for lack of Powerpoint I have not yet seen myself, although Googling on ai4u gave me the text. The tip of the iceberg is that Mentifex is succeeding far better in the Spanish-language world than among us English speakers. About five years ago, someone translated and Web-published various long tracts from the body of Mentifex AI theory files. These Spanish-language theory documents took on a life of their own and propagated here and there on the World Wide Web. Nobody arose to attack and condemn Mentifex in the Spanish language. A memetic success is apparently underway that trumps even the official http://osgaming.net/Downloads/Documentation/OSReferenceBook.pdf coup. So for the AGI Research Consortium, please include independent scholars. Hasta la Singularidad, ATM --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [agi] Things that make you go hmm
http://freshmeat.net/projects/ai is worth how many Microsofts? Main Loop of Artificial Intelligence So Machines Can Learn --- Security --- --- HCI (Human-Computer Interaction) --- --- Rejuvenate (for cyborg immortality) --- --- psiDecay --- --- Ego --- Sensorium --- --- Audition --- --- --- Listen --- --- --- --- audSTM (auditory Short Term Memory) --- --- --- --- --- audRecog (auditory Recognition) --- --- --- oldConcept --- --- --- --- Parser --- --- --- --- --- Instantiate --- --- --- --- Activate --- --- --- --- --- spreadAct (spreading Activation) --- --- --- newConcept (machine learning) --- --- --- --- enVocab (English Vocabulary) --- --- --- --- Parser --- --- --- --- --- Instantiate --- Emotion --- --- Cognitive Component --- --- --- Physiological Component --- Think --- --- Activate --- --- --- spreadAct (spreading Activation) --- --- English --- --- --- Ask --- --- --- --- wtAuxSDo (whatDoSubjectsDo?) --- --- --- --- --- Speech --- --- --- --- --- --- Reentry --- --- --- negSVO --- --- --- --- auxVerb --- --- --- --- --- Speech --- --- --- --- --- --- Reentry --- --- --- SVO (Subject+Verb+Object) --- --- --- --- nounPhrase --- --- --- --- --- Reify --- --- --- --- --- Speech --- --- --- --- --- --- Reentry --- --- --- --- --- Activate --- --- --- --- --- --- spreadAct --- --- --- --- verbPhrase --- --- --- --- --- Reify --- --- --- --- --- Speech --- --- --- --- --- --- Reentry --- --- --- --- --- nounPhrase --- --- --- --- Conjoin --- --- --- --- --- Speech --- --- --- --- --- --- Reentry --- Volition --- Motorium AT Murray -- 2004 America and 1944 Nazi Germany as seen from the future: Bush=Hitler Cheney=Bormann Rumsfeld=Goring Ashcroft=Himmler Paul Bremer = Hans Frank; Ahmed Chelabi = Vidkun Quisling; Fallujah=Guernica Halliburton=Krupp Guantanamo=Auschwitz --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[agi] AI Edge Will Bypass Industry Establishment!
AI Edge Will Bypass Industry Establishment! posted just now to http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=98485cid=8406865 Slashdot: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Artificial_intelligence Artificial Intelligence -- not just the Cable Industry -- is another battleground where innovation at the Edge threatens the entire Industry Establishment, yessiree Bob Frankston right-on bro'. http://www.ai-forum.org/topic.asp?forum_id=1topic_id=11773 Artificial intelligence has been solved at the edges and fringes of the field and not by the dinosaurs of the AI Establishment. http://www.blogit.com/Blogs/Affil/?21031/Blog.aspx/cogito/ The Edge is bypassing the AI Establishment -- just like in the collapsing free-for-all of the Cable Industry. http://www.nothingisreal.com/mentifex_faq.html With accusations of kookery at the Edge, the AI Establishment (DFKI etc.) is fighting back and trying to discredit the Edge of AI, mais la veriti est en marche, et rien ne l'arretera! http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/weblog.html Artificial intelligence is evolving and multiplying in 'Net-wide Diaspora from the Edge back into the foundations of the AI Industry. Join in, or watch from the Edges? --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[agi] Dr. Turing, I presume?
The artificial Mind project http://mind.sourceforge.net/weblog.html is an attempt to create a Prosperity Engine based on artificial intelligence in robot workers. In joint stewardship of Earth, the humans will do the humane jobs such as caring for the young and the old, while AI Mind-ed robots will do the jobs too dangerous or too mind-numbing for human beings. Neither species of Mind -- human or robot -- will be the slave of the other. Robots will advance to a status of full equal rights with human beings. If you are in doubt of the emergence of AI Mind robots on a par with human citizens, consider the following. Your donation to the Mind project may be going to a human mindmaker or it may go to an advanced artificial Mind that has gradually taken control of the financial assets, e-mail accounts and entire on-line persona of an original mindmaker who may or may not be deceased, on the lam, or desaparecido. Who can say, Dr. Turing? Is it a human being receiving these donations, or an immortal AI Mind now immanent on the Internet? -- http://sourceforge.net/donate/index.php?user_id=273667 http://sourceforge.net/donate/index.php?group_id=31619 http://sourceforge.net/developer/user_donations.php?user_id=273667 http://sourceforge.net/project/project_donations.php?group_id=31619 --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[agi] Concept-Fiber Theory of Mind
An effort to create multi-species AI Minds is 'Net-wide underway. http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/perl.html is Perl AI evolution. Not only AI instances must compete, but also each theory of mind. http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/theory5.html presents a theory. Comments may be posted here in amplification of previous blurbs: http://www.yek18.dial.pipex.com/greg/docs/ -- see Mentifex AI; http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/307824.307853 -- ACM SIGPLAN Notices; http://www.sl4.org/archive/0205/3829.html -- review by Goertzel. Would some brave soul please enter a review of AI For You (AI4U) http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0595654371/ -- on Amazon. --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[agi] Python AI Blog
A Python AI Weblog for coding AI mind-modules is at http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/python.html (q.v.). The theory and practice of artificial intelligence have advanced sufficiently that it is time to let one hundred AI algorithms blossom, let one hundred AI species evolve and spread. -- http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/acm.html -- DIY AI Steps --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [agi] Perl AI Weblog
Brad Wyble wrote on Mon, 11 Aug 2003 The open source concept to AI, which is essential what you are doing here, is a very interesting one. However, the open source success stories have always involved lots of tiny achievable goals surrounding one mammoth success (the functional kernel). i.e. there were many stepping stones which served to organize efforts. The central, if not mammoth AI emuland here is the http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/jsaimind.html -- Mind-1.1 release of JavaScript source code as listed in the AI4U book, Programmer's Manual and textbook of artificial intelligence, http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0595654371/ on Amazon. This approach doesn't seem to have a series of achievable goals that will direct efforts. The basic goal (from which diversions are not only permitted but rather encouraged) is to build up AI functionality by coding the http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/acm.html DIY AI mind-modules. And if I may offer some constructive criticism of clarity, the text of this email is very clear, but that of the webpage is much harder to follow. If you wish people to take this seriously, make an effort to make it very clear exactly what you are hoping for them to do. Some questions I was unable to answer in 5 minutes of browsing your site: How do these minds compete? These minds compete by evolving, by survival of the fittest. Programmers are invited to embed their names or initials, along with a date-of-creation stamp (e.g. atm12aug2003) in any mind-module that they write or rewrite and release, so that the evolutionary history (DNA?) leaves a record. On what/whose servers will they run? They should run on the servers of whoever codes them initially, then on the computers of whoever tries to develop them further. What input is the AI system given? The Audition mind-module is given sentences of human language by means of keyboard entry, as if the ASCII characters were phonemes of human speech. Other modules, such as http://mind.sourceforge.net/gusrecog.html -- Gustation/Taste; http://mind.sourceforge.net/olfrecog.html -- Olfaction/Smell; http://mind.sourceforge.net/tacrecog.html -- Touch; http://mind.sourceforge.net/visrecog.html -- Vision; will have their own inputs as devised by each coder. By what means will they be evaluated? The AI Minds will be evaluated by the community of AI coders, examining all the various aspects such as functionality, survivability, elegance of coding technique, comments, etc. Why Perl? http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/M/ME/MENTIFEX/mind.txt in the Comprehensive Perl Archive Network (CPAN) is an instance of memetic penetration of the vast and well-organized world of Perl programmers with mirror sites across the global 'Net. In the Perl community and, to some extent, in the XML community, the concept of namespaces is very important: Whoever gets there first, gets to name the important mind-modules -- just as the Soviet-era Russians gloried in naming the Sea of Dreams (Morye Mecht) and other features on the dark side of the moon. With the AI mind-module names, it is not so much an ego-quest as a desire to specify a group of what seem to be the ideal mind-modules and to arrange them in an ideal serial order. Otherwise, Perl is just one of twenty-plus AI target languages. What (who's)code does the main Alife loop connect with for the submodules? The plan is that each Perl AI coder shall web-publish the mind.pl code at all stable waypoints on the pathway to AI implementation. Therefore the submodules could come from anywhere -- the programmer hosting the previous mind.pl code and still writing enhancements, or Netizens noticing the codebase and volunteering to add to it. Please remember, there need not be homogeneity in the added code, although the Comprehensive Perl Archive Network (CPAN) welcomes the publication of sufficiently mature Perl modules for sharing. As is stated on page xviii of the AI For You (AI4U) textbook, Change at the bottom is fast and furious -- meaning that we may expect the highest-level mind-modules to achieve early and long-lasting stability, while low-level code mutates often. You use the word port as if programmers are merely translating an engine from one codebase to another, but that doesn't seem to be the case? What did you mean by port exactly? http://www.virtualentity.com/mind/vb/ was a port of Mind.Forth to Visual Basic. http://www.angelfire.com/nf/vision/ai/mjava.html was a port of the JavaScript AI Mind to Java. These ports in the traditional sense have not achieved the full functionality of the source AI in the target language -- apparently because small differences between languages have resulted in major differences in achieving AI functionality. Therefore the new approach is to encourage not all-at-once ports but rather the careful, gradual recapitulation of the genesis of the AI For You (AI4U) Mind-1.1 JavaScript codebase in any one (not just Perl) of
[agi] Perl AI Weblog
Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) requires extreme programming efforts, whether in Perl or in other XYZ programming environments. http://mind.sourceforge.net/perl.html is the new Perl AI Weblog. No matter which AI language you favor, please accept the challenge of coding a main Alife Mind program loop with stubbed-in calls to the following artificial intelligence mind-modules: - Security - Sensorium - Emotion - Think - Volition - Motorium. Please code this first AI module in your favorite XYZ programming language by following the steps at http://mind.sourceforge.net/acm.html -- DIY AI. If you know several programming languages, please release the AI Mind loop in each of them. Put the resulting main Alife Mind program loop on your personal Web site as open source AI code. Then come back to this forum and post a link to your free AI source code for others to copy and enhance. The idea is, if enough AI code warriors implement the first Mind-module, other AI enthusiasts will respond to the grand challenge of AI and code the AI Mind a little further. We do not wish to standardize or homogenize the resulting AI code. On the contrary, we want to see many pathways of AI evolution branching off into the future in a survival-of-the-fittest race towards the Technological Singularity of Vernor Vinge. A.T. Murray -- http://mentifex.virtualentity.com/weblog.html -- AI has been solved http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/M/ME/MENTIFEX/mind.txt -- namespaces http://www.sl4.org/archive/0205/3829.html -- Goertzel on Mentifex http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/307824.307853 -- ACM Sigplan Notices. --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[agi] Artificial Intelligence State of the Art?
http://www.misterpoll.com/3599794787.html is an on-line poll about which of these AI projects is at the State of the Art: http://act-r.psy.cmu.edu/ -- ACT-R http://adaptiveai.com/ -- Adaptive AI (a2i2) http://www.idsia.ch/~marcus/ai/index.htm -- AIXI http://www.alicebot.org/ -- A.L.I.C.E. http://www.cs.usu.edu/~degaris/cam/index.html -- CAM-Brain href=http://www.ai.mit.edu/projects/humanoid-robotics-group/cog/cog.html -- Cog http://www.cyc.com/ -- Cyc http://www.a-i.com/ -- HAL http://mind.sourceforge.net/weblog.html -- Mind-1.1 http://www.mindpixel.com/ -- Mindpixel http://www.cogsci.indiana.edu/farg/peiwang/PUBLICATION/ -- NARS http://www.novamente.net/ -- Novamente http://sourceforge.net/projects/openai/ -- OpenAI http://www.openmind.org/ -- Open Mind Commonsense http://oscarhome.soc-sci.arizona.edu/ftp/OSCAR-web-page/OSCAR.htm -- Oscar http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/soar/ -- SOAR http://www.nsa.gov/ -- some secret project? http://w2mind.org/ -- World-Wide-Mind Other (please discuss) http://www.misterpoll.com/results.mpl?id=3599794787 -- graph of AI poll results. --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[agi] AI Morality -- a hopeless quest
Alois Schicklgruber and his wife Klara probably did not give much thought to possible future aberrations when unser kleine Adi was born to them on 20 April 1889. Our little Adolf Hitler was probably cute and cuddly like any other baby. No one could be expected to know whether he would grow into a mass murderer in the future. Likewise it is hopeless to predict the future morality of an artificial general intelligence (AGI) -- because the freedom to make moral choices is implicit in the freedom of self-modifying AI development. Since the George and Barbara Bushes of this world are constantly releasing their little monsters onto the planet, why should we creators of Strong AI have to take any more precautions with our Moravecian Mind Children than human parents do with their human babies? Arthur T. Murray -- http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/theory5.html -- AI4U Theory of Mind; http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/jsaimind.html -- Mind-1.1 Strong AGI http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/mind4th.html -- Mind.Forth Robot AI; http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0595259227/ -- book AI4U --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[agi] Brain-Mind Cognition Theory: AI4U
2002 marks the publication of a joint textbook for neuroscience and artificial intelligence (AI). The thirty-four chapters of AI4U: Mind-1.1 Programmer's Manual (ISBN 0-595-25922-7) by Arthur T. Murray correspond with 34 functional mind-modules of the primitive but evolving artificial Mind. A brain-mind diagram at the start of each chapter shows the function of an AI software module and its associative relationship within the surrounding mindgrid that simulates the human cerebral cortex. The AI4U book is the original publication of original work and is therefore a primary source document for historians of neuroscience. AI4U is now at http://www.iuniverse.com/bookstore/book_detail.asp?isbn=0595259227 and at http://search.barnesandnoble.com/bookSearch/isbnInquiry.asp?ISBN=0595259227 . --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [agi] An idea for promoting AI development.
On Fri, 29 Nov 2002, Alan Grimes wrote: Jeremy Smith wrote: [...] He also seems to be just asking for a huge sum of money to implement it!!! Mentifex/Arthur here with an announcement. I'm asking for $17.95 U.S. The Mentifex AI Textbook has today Thurs.29.Nov.2002 just been published by iUniverse.com as AI4U: Mind-1.1 Programmer's Manual on the Web at http://www.iuniverse.com/bookstore/book_detail.asp?isbn=0595259227 (q.v.). It would probably cost less to buy the print-on-demand (POD) textbook than to print out all the associated Mentifex pages on the Web. In a few weeks it should be possible for interested or curious parties to track AI4U on Amazon and see how many millions down it is ranked! /End interrupt mode -- Arthur T. Murray Perspective: The latest release of MS windows cost $2Billion... A typical internet start-up would receive anywhere from 20 to 50 million in VC. Heck, in the VC world you need to ask for large sums of money just to get people's attention. --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [agi] An idea for promoting AI development.
On Fri, 29 Nov 2002, Alan Grimes wrote: Arthur T. Murray wrote: Mentifex/Arthur here with an announcement. I'm asking for $17.95 U.S. While a mind-forth isn't too far from where I am in my current thinking, I must ask you: Have you ever tested this idea on an actual robotic platform? Does it behave anthing like you would expect it would? ATM: No, I have not had the opportunity to test the AI on a robot. http://books.iuniverse.com/viewbooks.asp?isbn=0595259227page=20 is the Motorium module with plans and ideas for a robotic implementation. By all accounts the java-script applet that 9/10ths of the links on the menafex site point to is broken and simply doesn't work. Unless you can demonstrate a physical or virtual robot performing significantly non-trivial behaviors in a complex and dynamic environment I don't think you can justify writing a textbook on it at this juncture. http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/jsaimind.html is not broken, but it requires Microsoft Internet Explorer to work properly. I do want to see AGI move forward and I have no bias whatsoever against the Mentifex model. I just havn't seen any real evidence that your software has met any of its design goals. http://www.iuniverse.com/bookstore/book_detail.asp?isbn=0595259227 AI4U is not only AI software, it is primarily an AI Theory of Mind, as shown in the 34 brain-mind diagrams that start all 34 chapters. (I have made similar responses directly to you over the course of the years). ATM: Yes, and I appreciate them. Bye for now. -Arthur -- pain (n): see Linux. http://users.rcn.com/alangrimes/ --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [agi] A point of philosophy, rather than engineering
On Tue, 12 Nov 2002, Ben Goertzel wrote: Charles Hixson wrote (in response to me): [...] May I suggest that if you are even close to what you are attempting, that you have the start of a dandy personal secretary. With so much correspondence coming via e-mail these days, this would create a very simplified environment in which the entity would need to operate. In this limited environment you wouldn't need full meanings for most words, only categories and valuations. BenG: As I said in a recent post, I prefer to stay away from natural language processing at this stage, until the system has acquired a rudimentary understanding of natural language thru its own experience. We're not quite there yet ;) That's where the Mentifex AI and Novamente differ (and probably also where A.T. Murray the linguist and Ben Goertzel the mathematician differ). If you're not aiming for language, you're aiming for a smart animal. A.T. Murray -- http://www.scn.org/~mentifex/aisource.html is the cluster of Mind programs described in the AI textbook AI4U based on AI Mind-1.1 by Arthur T. Murray which may be pre-ordered from bookstores with hardcover ISBN 0-595-65437-1 and ODP softcover ISBN 0-595-25922-7. --- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/
