You win Mike! You Win!!!
I will, John, indeed. If you analyse Deutsch you will find that despite my insuperable tech-illiteracy, his arguments are v. close to mine,– just not as well put For example, he argues against induction for AGI – quite rightly – just doesn’t go the whole hog and argue against logic, period, as I do. And against Bayes and “prediction”. As I’ve done. And puts the focus on creativity as the central AGI problem, as I do. (No Ben just pays lip-service, but never actually deals with creativity in his work) And he argues for a totally new kind of program – just thinks it might be another algorithm. Well, my improvisational program, with no pre-planned agenda, unlike all programs to date and the TM, is indeed a totally new kind of program – and follows the universal method of all creative fields and projects. Of course, Deutsch isn’t a “high-end visionary” like your hero, Ben (are you serious?) ... only the pioneer of quantum computation, but hey... If you were creatively and philosophically literate and not just narrow AI-tech-literate, John, you would know that in creative matters, “nobody knows anything” (William Goldman) – “literacy” isn’t a big deal. Understanding the problem, esp. in a non-tech, “cross-tech” way, and being able to think and argue about it directly, (rather than always, always avoiding it), is. From: John G. Rose Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2012 3:27 PM To: AGI Subject: RE: [agi] The Non-Mathematical Nature of Pictures/Irregular Forms Mike, The Singularity could have occurred last year and your posthumanist essence would still be arguing that blobs cannot be computed. I.. I … I just don’t have it in me … to try to explain it …. OK. AGI can never be built. You win Mike! You Win!!! John From: Mike Tintner [mailto:[email protected]] John, Why don’t you answer the problems set, rather than just throw around abuse? You gave no example of an improvisational program along the lines I outlined, just asserted that there was one. You will give no example of how maths can deal with the problems I set. You can give no example of how maths is contributing anywhere to a demonstrable AGI result. You are arguing like a child, not a serious person who engages with problems , evidence and examples – or who is really interested in AGI. The problem of recognizing and drawing the multiform/polyform/infinite-form manifestations of a “line” is central to AGI. Put up something concrete. From: John G. Rose Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2012 2:32 PM To: AGI Subject: RE: [agi] The Non-Mathematical Nature of Pictures/Irregular Forms Ya just because Mike has a mental knot when it comes to understand maths and logic needn’t mean that it should hinder others progress here on AGI research. This is definitely a strange curiosity… Whatever! Mike, go do some research we’re not your maths tutors here… people have tried to explain some basics to you many times already. John From: Steve Richfield [mailto:[email protected]] Tudor (and Mike), Responding to these posts may be good exercise for your fingers, but talking about something where the listener has no clue what the subject is, is a COMPLETE waste of your valuable time and effort. I have tried and failed, as will you and anyone else who takes Mike's bait. Mike has absolutely NO clue regarding the prospective boundaries of mathematics, or for that matter, even what advanced mathematics might be useful for. Mike in effect "thinks" that he can proceed in some sort of quasi-useful direction without ANY form or manipulable representation. That Mike has apparently made it through his teenage years while preserving this thought should be ABSOLUTE PROOF that you might as well be sending your responses to the bit bucket. That our neurons manipulate their inputs is pretty good proof that whatever is being represented is manipulable, and therefore easily within the grasp of some sort of suitable mathematics (that may or may not yet exist). Everyone easily sees this but Mike. Mike "thinks" we are all running in the wrong direction, but he has yet to make his case. I continue to read his postings in the continuing hope that he has woke up the challenge of explaining his vision to the rest of us mere mortals, but so far, no joy. However, I no longer respond to his crazy attacks on all of mathematics. Steve AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription ------------------------------------------- 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
<<wlEmoticon-smile[1].png>>
