BTW, John, I encourage you to pursue the CTMU as AGI framework. I think it is the best bet in terms of filling in AIXI's free parameters (UTM choice & Utility Function choice) in a principled manner. Aside from being a plausible potential advance over AIXI as a top down AGI theory, it would go a long way toward heading off the "post-modernist" hysteria that is attempting to put OUGHT before IS in the current gold-rush -- putting them on what I suppose Chris might call "an equal, alpha/omega, self-dual footing".
I would probably spend some of my time pursuing that avenue myself were it not for a disagreement I had with the Mega Foundation regarding its management of volunteer resources. This, in turn, put me in a position where they rejected my $100/month sacrifices to that Foundation -- a pretty serious disagreement which has nothing to do with the CTMU validity or lack thereof per se. I'm instead putting $100/month into the Hutter Prize in the form of Bitcoin -- which I just awarded to Saurabh Kumar. On Mon, Aug 7, 2023 at 8:32 AM James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: > Chris Langan's CTMU does seem to offer a unification if IS with OUGHT > within a computational framework and that is indeed why I initially > contacted him regarding Algorithmic Information Theory's potential of > providing at least the IS in what he calls "The Linear Ectomorphic > Semimodel of Reality" aka, ordinary linear time of mechanistic science. > > But really, John, give me a break. The problem of getting people to be > reasonable about just mechanistic science, given the noise imposed on > science by the likes of Popper and Kuhn, is hard enough. > > On Mon, Aug 7, 2023 at 8:28 AM John Rose <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Sunday, August 06, 2023, at 7:06 PM, James Bowery wrote: >> >> Better compression requires not just correlation but causation, which is >> the entire point of going beyond statistics/Shannon Information criteria to >> dynamics/Algorithmic information criterion. >> >> Regardless of your values, if you can't converge on a global dynamical >> model of causation you are merely tinkering with subsystems in an >> incoherent fashion. You'll end up robbing Peter to pay Paul -- having >> unintended consequences affecting your human ecologies -- etc. >> >> That's why engineers need scientists -- why OUGHT needs IS -- why SDT >> needs AIT -- etc. >> >> >> I like listening to non-mainstream music for different perspectives. I >> wonder what Cristopher Langan thinks of the IS/OUGHT issue with his >> atemporal non-dualistic protocomputational view of determinism/causality. I >> like the idea of getting rid of time… and/or multidimensional time… Also >> I’m a big fan of free will. Free will gives us a tool to fight totalitarian >> systems. We can choose not to partake in systems, for example modRNA >> injections and CBDC's. So we need to fight to maintain free will IMHO. >> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBjmne9X1VQ >> >> John >> *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/T772759d8ceb4b92c-M85774330f9c2a75525e1a0ff> >> ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T772759d8ceb4b92c-M92062bc9fb0ce4070d8161f1 Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
