This is not kindergarden and we don't get prizes for just "trying". The works that were most influential were not AGI, of course, but at least contributed meaningful scientific or engineering insight into the problem.
G On Sunday, April 21, 2019, MP via AGI <[email protected]> wrote: > Well hold on now, I never claimed to think his code is AGI. What I admire > about it is that it's one of the few attempts at solving it - a real, > honest, genuine attempt at the grand challenge. It's not some elusive > corporate thing we'd never see the source code or even programs from; It's > at least *something* > > What about things like the Godel Machine and AIXI? Are you going to shit > on them too because the math is too hard for you to understand? > > What about kurzweil's pattern recognition theory of mind? > > Dianetics? > > How about SOAR or ACT-R? What's wrong, lisp got your tongue? > > And you have the Nigel AGI, Novamente, and a host of other claims that are > nothing more than baseless hype with no substance behind them. Yet you > won't make any fuss about that because they've given you concepts easy > enough for a small minded individual like yourself to digest and make you > feel smart about the illusion of knowing how the mind works. > > My point is that he's made an attempt. Maybe not a good one, maybe not > even a functional one, but he's at least one of the few people to actively > work on it. > > Again, what do you have to show? > > > Sent from ProtonMail mobile > > > > -------- Original Message -------- > On Apr 20, 2019, 5:12 PM, justcamel < [email protected]> wrote: > > > Don't get me wrong ... I love you as a human being ... I see you as my > human brother and love you with all of my heart ... but you are fucking > stupid for even arguing. I could shit on my keyboard and have the > keystrokes converted into random compiling Perl code and you would argue > that it's potential AGI ... that's how horrible you seem to be at > understanding Perl and AGI. > On 21/04/2019 00:08, MP via AGI wrote: > > Have you even tried to read his code for yourself and tried to understand > it? > > > Sent from ProtonMail mobile > > > > -------- Original Message -------- > On Apr 20, 2019, 5:06 PM, justcamel < [email protected]> wrote: > > > Do you even realize how stupid it is to defend a spammer with a code that > consists of 15.000 nonsensical lines ... who now writes 3 pages about this > nonsensical concept of "Latin AI" ... like intelligence has anything to do > with Russian, English or Latin ... like you tackle AGI by switching from > Russian to Latin ... and by hardcoding 100 random words via global arrays > ... and again ... his code does N O T H I N G. > > If you don't understand this then maybe read some mailing list you > actually understand and don't defend spam that has been going on for > decades ... > On 20/04/2019 23:51, MP via AGI wrote: > > Hey, at least he's doing something with his life. Where's any work of > yours you spent decades on? Even if he's completely wrong - which I'm sure > he is - at least he has something he can claim as his life's work. > > I don't appreciate anyone here belittling him, honestly. Yes, I know, it's > mostly ramblings, but again, he's at least trying to tackle the grand > challenge. What do any of his attackers have instead? Absolutely nothing. > > This toxic behavior against him is disgusting. > > > Sent from ProtonMail mobile > > > > -------- Original Message -------- > On Apr 20, 2019, 4:47 PM, justcamel < [email protected]> wrote: > > > Amazing that one brain can be so full of nonsense and still allow the > human to operate in this world ... > On 20/04/2019 23:24, A.T. Murray wrote: > > Three days ago on impulse we began coding a Latin AI Mind in JavaScript > for MSIE. We used JavaScript for the sake of what culture snobs call > "accessability". In art or in culture, if a work is "accessable", it means > that even hoi polloi can appreciate it. We classicists of ancient Greek and > Latin are extremely snobby, exceeded in this regard perhaps only by the > Egyptologists and by those who know Sanskrit. In fact, our local university > newspaper had an article a few weeks ago claiming that there are five > million modern speakers of Sanskrit and only nine individual speakers > worldwide who speak Latin as a second language. Immediately I took offense > because they obviously did not include memetipsum among the precious nine > speakers of Latin. On the Internet I tried to hunt down the source of this > allegation, this lese-majestation, this Chushingura-worthy objurgation that > only nine Earthlings speak Latin. The insult and the non-inclusion festered > in my Latin-speaking mind so much that I decided three days ago to show > them that not only are there more than nine Latin-speakers, but that even > imbecile Windoze machines can speak and think in Latin. And once I launched > the Latin AI project, I discovered that the fun and excitement of it all > grew on me and sucked me in stronger and stronger -- citius, altius, > fortius. Sure, it's just a hobby, but it's better than fiddling while Notre > Dame burns. > > For my first release of the Mens Latina three nights ago, I simply did a > mutatis mutandis of changing the interface of my previous AI from English > into Latin, and I changed the links at the top from English links into > Latin links. Then I ran it up the Internet flagpole to see if anybody would > salute it, but nobody did. > > For my second release I actually inserted some Latin concepts into the > MindBoot sequence, but I had a terrible time trying to figure out a new > name for the English word "MindBoot". At first I was going to call it the > OmniScium as if it knew everything, but then I settled on PraeScium as the > sequence of innate prior knowledge that gets the AI up and running. I did > some more mutatis of the mutandis by changing the names of the main > thinking modules from English into Latin. But when I ran the AI, it > reduplicated the final word of its only innate idea and it said "EGO SUM > PERSONA PERSONA". Today for a third release we need to troubleshoot the > problem. > > For the third release we have added one more innate idea, "TU ES HOMO" for > "You are a human being." We put some temporary activation on the pronoun > "TU" so that the Latin AI would find the activated idea and speak it. > Unfortunately, the AI says "TU ES HOMO HOMO". Something is still causing > reduplication. > > Into the "PraeScium" MindBoot section we added the words "QUID" for "what" > and "EST" for "is", so that the SpreadAct module could ask a question about > any new, unknown word. We mutandied the necessary mutatis in SpreadAct and > we began to see some actual thinking in Latin, some conversation between > Robo Sapiens and Homo Sapiens. We entered the word "terra" and the AI said, > "QUID EST TERRA". We answered "TERRA EST RES" and the AI asked us, "QUID > EST RES". It is now possible to ask the AI "quid sum ego" but, to quote > Vergil, responsa non dabantur fida satis. > > Mentis versio Abra003A in die Sat Apr 20 08:26:34 PDT 2019 > Robo Sapiens: TU ES HOMO HOMO > Homo Sapiens: terra > > Robo Sapiens: QUID EST TERRA > Homo Sapiens: terra est res > > Robo Sapiens: QUID EST RES > Homo Sapiens: > > Robo Sapiens: > Homo Sapiens: quid sum ego > > Robo Sapiens: TU ES HOMO HOMO ES HOMO HOMO > Homo Sapiens: > > -- > http://ai.neocities.org/Abracadabra.html > > http://medium.com/p/237437640203 > > *Artificial General Intelligence List <https://agi.topicbox.com/latest>* > / AGI / see discussions <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi> + > participants <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/members> + delivery > options <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription> Permalink > <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T9baf73b813714625-Mc6c890db612c2340cbf7aa61> > > ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T9baf73b813714625-M5e72f3853e7cafaf45b8fbca Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
