> > Not at all. To participate in the reverse Turing test, all that is needed > is to set aside a few hours to compete, which I would find enjoyable. The > TOTAL commitment would be a day or so, and it could potentially yield SO > much information.
I don't *want *to set aside a few hours, much less a day or so, because I have not been convinced of the utility of participation in such a thing. It sounds like a total waste of time. > The problem is that people don't even want to THINK (perish the thought) > that English might NOT be well structured, as all other theories predict. I have actually given this a lot of thought. In fact, I already agree with you, to an extent. (I think it's not well structured, but that the structural flaws can be reliably resolved using certain techniques that we ourselves use.) I might bother discussing your theory with you, if I knew where to find it and read about it without having to read an entire patent application or whatever. Not wanting to explore the rock-paper-scissors or the SUVFM issues, etc., > tells me that there is NOT ONE true scientist here, as in promoting AGI > without investigating its underpinnings is truly a fools errand, akin to > promoting rapid low-temperature fusion, aka DIY hydrogen bombs. What does rock-paper-scissors have to do with AGI any more than any other game? What makes you think none of us have investigated the underpinnings of intelligence? And no, I'm not a scientist. I'm a creative engineer -- an inventor. I already have a mental model that fits the phenomenon to my satisfaction (for now; it's constantly being honed), and my focus is on building something that works, not on painstakingly proving my intuitions with mathematical theorems or performing endless experiments to make sure my model is correct. If and when I run into something my model can't handle, I will extend or modify my model. This process necessarily converges to a model that is good enough for my purposes. Building my system is my experiment. When the system I build succeeds (or fails), that will be my proof. And if it fails, I will improve it until it succeeds. Read the history of the combustion engine. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_internal_combustion_engine) Carnot came up with the theory to explain its operation *after *it had already been built. This helped to understand its operation in greater depth, which greatly contributed to its continued incremental improvement, but it was not necessary for its invention. Intuition came first. Intuition almost always comes first. On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 10:29 AM, Steve Richfield <[email protected] > wrote: > Aaron, > > On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 8:17 AM, Aaron Hosford <[email protected]>wrote: > >> I tried that, but NO ONE was interested in participating. You see, people >>> are interested in THEIR AI project, not someone else's AI project. >> >> >> >>> You seem to have found a path. I have tried to drum up interest in a >>> number of things here on this forum that I think are REALLY important, all >>> to no avail. To illustrate, I have looked for interest here on the AGI >>> forum in: >>> 1. An automated rock-paper-scissors competition, to study the forces >>> that underlie the "flash crash". I see some crossover between this and >>> compression, as both are about detecting subtle patterns. Any thoughts? >>> 2. A reverse Turing test competition, where teams of people would >>> compete to emulate a high-end AGI. I think this is a MUST before investing >>> a dime in AGI research, just to see where this might be leading. I would >>> LOVE to participate in such a competition, but I would probably get stuck >>> operating it. However, NO ONE (else) has expressed any interest. >>> 3. Working on a scanning UV fluorescence microscope to fill in some of >>> the holes in our present understanding of neural systems. This actually >>> netted a fair amount of resistance on the AGI forum. >>> 4. Wringing out the linguistic theory that underlies DrEliza. I have a >>> new theory of language that seems to be closer to the truth than other >>> theories, which I included in the patent application, but so far NO ONE has >>> even commented on it, beyond advancing their own theories that can't >>> possibly work nearly as well. >>> I sometimes wonder if there is anyone out there besides some clever >>> chatbot responders that challenge everything and do nothing. >>> >> >> You are going to a group of visionaries and asking them to drop their >> own visions and take up yours. >> > > Not at all. To participate in the reverse Turing test, all that is needed > is to set aside a few hours to compete, which I would find enjoyable. The > TOTAL commitment would be a day or so, and it could potentially yield SO > much information. > > Also, the linguistic theory only requires reading and discussing, like we > are doing with SO many issues right here. The problem is that people don't > even want to THINK (perish the thought) that English might NOT be well > structured, as all other theories predict. > > Not wanting to explore the rock-paper-scissors or the SUVFM issues, etc., > tells me that there is NOT ONE true scientist here, as in promoting AGI > without investigating its underpinnings is truly a fools errand, akin to > promoting rapid low-temperature fusion, aka DIY hydrogen bombs. > > Of course there are other opinions on these issues, none of which I see as > responsible. > > Steve > ================== > >> What else would you expect? Of *course *we are busy with our own >> projects. We are leaders, not followers. If you want followers, don't >> expect other leaders to drop what they are doing and completely change >> their personalities. This list is the wrong place to find people who are >> willing to jump on your bandwagon. >> >> There's a reason crowd-sourcing is gaining so much popularity lately. If >> you took Matt's actual advice and opened your system up so that other >> people could add to its knowledge base -- which is not the same as working >> on your project -- then you would be getting a lot of labor for free. Yes, >> each contribution might be small, but lots of nickels and dimes add up to >> big bills. And no one would be expected to drop everything they are doing, >> so you'd get much higher participation. >> >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 10:09 PM, Steve Richfield < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Matt, >>> >>> On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Matt Mahoney >>> <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 6:48 PM, Steve Richfield >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> > Remember when it was announced that Apple Computer had more money in >>>> the >>>> > bank than the U.S. Government? >>>> >>>> Who doesn't? The U.S. government is $16 trillion in the hole. But they >>>> can print money, so it's not a problem, right? >>>> >>> >>> Wrong!!! A corporation known as the Federal Reserve Bank owns and prints >>> the money, and loans it to the U.S. for our use. The Fed paid for Woodrow >>> Wilson's presidential campaign in return for his setting this up. >>> >>>> >>>> > All it will take is for the economy to start to take off for this >>>> money to >>>> > come out of the bank and go into investments, whereupon to maintain >>>> > equilibrium there MUST be an immediate ~5:1 hyperinflation. >>>> >>>> I doubt it. Companies that have cash to spend keep it in investments >>>> like stocks and bonds. If they sold them all at once, the price of >>>> those investments would crash and the money wouldn't be there. >>>> >>> >>> Correct. This is a bubble just waiting to pop. When it starts down, it >>> is going to crash. >>> >>> Hyperinflation is caused by the government printing too much money. >>>> >>> >>> Actually, it happens when the government borrows too much money from the >>> FED, who prints it as needed. Of course, we know about the skyrocketing >>> debt situation. >>> >>> >>>> Currently the U.S. borrows 40% of its budget, or 10% of GDP by selling >>>> bonds, then prints money (qualitative easing) to buy them back and >>>> keep the interest rate near 0. This is convenient because it >>>> effectively taxes anyone holding investments in any form valued in >>>> dollars at 10% of their savings, and many of them are outside the U.S. >>>> where they would not otherwise pay taxes. >>> >>> >>> Have you been following the situation in Cyprus, where they are taxing >>> bank accounts at 40%!!! >>> >>> Other European countries have started taxing savings, but at MUCH lower >>> rates. >>> >>> I think it is important to tax savings, what the Muslims call zakat, to >>> push money out of mattresses and into the economy. >>> >>> >>>> We can get away with it >>>> because all of the other countries are doing the same thing. We should >>>> expect that inflation would be 10%, but we observe a lower rate >>>> because technology keeps making stuff cheaper. >>>> >>> >>> The actual rate of inflation is ~14%, but clever computation puts the >>> rate MUCH lower. It is all smoke and mirrors. The rising U.S. budget is >>> largely because of real inflation. >>> >>>> >>>> But if you really think it is a problem, then buy gold. >>>> >>> >>> That doesn't work either, because gold has been pushed WAY up in >>> anticipation of a crash, and it would crash back down as hyperinflation >>> corrects the monetary problems. >>> >>>> >>>> >> An unfortunate consequence of a free market is the unequal >>>> >> distribution of wealth. >>>> > >>>> > No, that is an unfortunate consequence of a bribocracy. All that is >>>> needed >>>> > is to make human labor worth more, e.g. by making it a bit scarce, >>>> e.g. by >>>> > limiting workweeks to 30 hours. So long as there is a glut of labor, >>>> we all >>>> > work for nothing. Of course, lobbyists will never let that happen. >>>> >>>> No it wouldn't. People specialize. Cutting hours 25% would just cut >>>> economic output by 25%. >>> >>> >>> No, it would just put everyone back to work. We would have MORE economic >>> output, because our workforce wouldn't be dead tired for the last 25% of >>> their workday. >>> >>> What is the choice - put everyone on food stamps? Then when the economy >>> gets even more screwed up, everyone starves. >>> >>> >>>> There will always be a few percent of the >>>> population that is unable or unwilling to work or that lack necessary >>>> job skills, and they would remain unemployed. >>>> >>> >>> Russia never had any problem employing everyone. In Oregon, they passed >>> a law that all gasoline MUST be pumped by gas station attendants. It is a >>> misdemeanor to pump your own gas. These sorts of laws CAN put EVERYONE to >>> work. >>> >>>> >>>> > Things have been on a long gradual downhill slide for the last half >>>> century. >>>> > I see no changing this trend. >>>> >>>> I observe no such trend. >>>> >>>> >>>> https://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&met_y=ny_gdp_mktp_cd&tdim=true&dl=en&hl=en&q=world%20gdp#!ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=ny_gdp_pcap_kd&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=region&ifdim=region&tdim=true&hl=en_US&dl=en&ind=false >>>> >>> >>> That is ~5%/year in dollars that are inflating at a rate of ~14%, for a >>> net loss of ~9%/year. >>> >>>> >>>> Other indicators are up too, like life expectancy. >>>> >>> >>> Nearly all of which comes from improving infant mortality. >>> >>>> >>>> >> My suggestion would be to open source Dr. Eliza and build a web >>>> >> interface where people can interact with it and add to its knowledge >>>> >> base. Maybe it won't be very good at first, but it will improve over >>>> >> time. >>>> > >>>> > I tried that, but NO ONE was interested in participating. You see, >>>> people >>>> > are interested in THEIR AI project, not someone else's AI project. >>>> >>>> I see the problem. There is no "AI project" that has any hope of >>>> succeeding. >>>> >>> >>> You seem to have found a path. I have tried to drum up interest in a >>> number of things here on this forum that I think are REALLY important, all >>> to no avail. To illustrate, I have looked for interest here on the AGI >>> forum in: >>> 1. An automated rock-paper-scissors competition, to study the forces >>> that underlie the "flash crash". I see some crossover between this and >>> compression, as both are about detecting subtle patterns. Any thoughts? >>> 2. A reverse Turing test competition, where teams of people would >>> compete to emulate a high-end AGI. I think this is a MUST before investing >>> a dime in AGI research, just to see where this might be leading. I would >>> LOVE to participate in such a competition, but I would probably get stuck >>> operating it. However, NO ONE (else) has expressed any interest. >>> 3. Working on a scanning UV fluorescence microscope to fill in some of >>> the holes in our present understanding of neural systems. This actually >>> netted a fair amount of resistance on the AGI forum. >>> 4. Wringing out the linguistic theory that underlies DrEliza. I have a >>> new theory of language that seems to be closer to the truth than other >>> theories, which I included in the patent application, but so far NO ONE has >>> even commented on it, beyond advancing their own theories that can't >>> possibly work nearly as well. >>> >>> I sometimes wonder if there is anyone out there besides some clever >>> chatbot responders that challenge everything and do nothing. >>> >>> > Apparently you don't see, or choose not to see, how sad this situation >>>> truly >>>> > is. When I got into programming in the 1960s, a typical interview >>>> consisted >>>> > of them explaining what they wanted, and asking me if I could build >>>> it. If I >>>> > answered "yes", then I got the job. I lived like a king back then, >>>> without >>>> > any thought to long-term financial stability in a market that was SO >>>> short >>>> > of highly skilled personnel. >>>> >>>> Maybe your job skills have not kept up with technology. >>> >>> >>> I never was a good 'droid, and I feel a little sorry for those who are >>> good 'droids. >>> >>> From your own story, I suspect that you aren't a good 'droid either, >>> which I see is to your credit. >>> >>> It can happen. >>>> Blaming the economy isn't going to solve the problem. >>>> >>> >>> But it IS important to understand the problems at hand, if we are going >>> to have any chance of setting things right. >>> >>> Steve >>> >>> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/23050605-2da819ff> | >>> Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription >>> <http://www.listbox.com> >>> >> >> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/10443978-6f4c28ac> | >> Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription >> <http://www.listbox.com> >> > > > > -- > Full employment can be had with the stoke of a pen. Simply institute a six > hour workday. That will easily create enough new jobs to bring back full > employment. > > *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/23050605-2da819ff> | > 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-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
