On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Abram Demski <[email protected]> wrote:

> This is *why* compression is a good test! It is a harsh test for "knowing".



Abram,
That doesn't make any sense.  You would have to substantiate that there is
a high correlation between compression with "knowing" in order to make that
statement.  So far, the only correlation is of the nature of statements
like those which say that calculators can do something that had previously
only been possible for human beings to do.  Although that kind of
achievement can be taken as evidence that computers are able to do some
kinds of thinking, that kind of thinking has been repeatedly repudiated in
this group as being "narrow AI" and not AGI.  So your claim that
compression is a good harsh test for knowing has to be absolutely
repudiated as well.

I am glad that I am able to categorize the compression-is-intelligence
approach as "narrow AI" even though I am not totally happy with that
label.  Because now, for the first time, I will be able to chip away at the
basis of the approach (at least in this group) without having to go through
some long winded reasoning that will be mostly ignored in this group (as it
obviously has been in the past.)

Compression is not a test for "knowing", except possibly for some special
cases of narrow AI methods.

Jim Bromer




On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Abram Demski <[email protected]> wrote:

> Jim,
>
> This is *why* compression is a good test! It is a harsh test for "knowing".
>
> --Abram
>
> On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 6:26 PM, Jim Bromer <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> One of the mistakes that the compressors-is-intelligence guys make is
>> that an ideal compression of knowledge cannot be made before knowing
>> occurs.  This is so obvious that some people will go to some lengths
>> to point it out.  But some of the implications are also really obvious
>> as well.
>>
>> If an ideal compression cannot be made before knowing has occurred
>> then an ideal compression can never be made for a program that is
>> capable of learning because it will always be able to learn something
>> new.  Isn't this obvious?
>> Jim Bromer
>>
>>
>> -------------------------------------------
>> AGI
>> Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
>> RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/7190161-766c6f07
>> Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;
>> Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Abram Demski
> http://lo-tho.blogspot.com/
>
>    *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now>
> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/10561250-164650b2> |
> Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription
> <http://www.listbox.com>
>



-------------------------------------------
AGI
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-c97d2393
Modify Your Subscription: 
https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-2484a968
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

Reply via email to