Samantha: Michael, you think no algorithm can be creative? What do you think results in your own creativity, if any? If it is not a set of biologically encoded algorithms then what exactly is it?
If you want to know, listen to: Samantha: Uh, a human baby has to do a lot of bumping up against the world, a lot of grasping, trying to move, trying to focus eyes, learning to make sounds intelligible. It's nondeterministically programmed improvisation - nondeterministically programmed improvised goal-seeking. That's what every infant does when it flails aroundin the ways you mention, that's what you're doing right now as you compose your posts. That's what all forms of creativity entail and very visibly demonstrably entail. You think creatives searching for inspiration, sometimes for years, are following algos - step-by-step preplanned courses of action ? What's the algo for a creative block? What's the algo that drives AGI projectbuilders to say "5 years if we really really try" when he actually hasn't the slightest ideas? What do you think H SImon was talking about when he talked about nonprogrammed, unstructured thinking as distinct from the programmed kind? I have written a lot about this here, Samantha - you sound like you're coming in at the tail-end. There are no creative algoirthms/recipes - algos are just amplified human routines, low level stuff if extremely useful. And whenever an AGI-er starts to offer a concrete example of "creative algorithms" as PM has just done, they only end up offering excuses. Always. On 3 December 2013 01:19, Samantha Atkins <[email protected]> wrote: > Michael, you think no algorithm can be creative? What do you think > results in your own creativity, if any? If it is not a set of biologically > encoded algorithms then what exactly is it? If it is a set of algorithms, > however encoded, then why can't it be implemented on a different substrate? > Perhaps your notion of "algorithm" is a bit too limited. > > > On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 11:28 AM, tintner michael <[email protected] > > wrote: > >> Oh please, PM. This is still dishonest. Ben tried this "read x.." ploy >> several times - never was anything there. >> >> Put up your example of algorithmic creativity for the enlightenment of >> all here. You can't. Neither can anyone else. >> >> Don';t lecture about "reasoning ability" until you're capable of >> reasoning from empirical examples. >> >> >> On 2 December 2013 19:13, Piaget Modeler <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> As a philosopher, I would think that you would like to read. >>> I hope you're not being lazy. >>> >>> Here's a starting point.... >>> >>> http://publications.csail.mit.edu/lcs/pubs/pdf/MIT-LCS-TR-563.pdf >>> >>> >>> As I said, once you have context, I will be happy to discuss this with >>> you. >>> Gain some context and let's discuss. This is the internet, it's not that >>> hard. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> ~PM >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 18:23:29 +0000 >>> >>> Subject: Re: [agi] I guess I don't have AGI all figured out. >>> From: [email protected] >>> To: [email protected] >>> >>> PM;We can't spoon feed each other endlessly. ..... >>> >>> That is the most cowardly and dishonest statement. It is typical. I am >>> sick of this kind of dishonesty. Put up or shut up. >>> >>> >>> On 2 December 2013 18:17, Piaget Modeler <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>> We can't spoon feed each other endlessly. Do a little research. Read >>> the book. >>> Let's discuss when you've obtained Drescher's thesis (probably online) >>> or read his book. >>> >>> Always happy to discuss... >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> ~PM. >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 18:06:54 +0000 >>> >>> Subject: Re: [agi] I guess I don't have AGI all figured out. >>> From: [email protected] >>> To: [email protected] >>> >>> PM The Schema System synthesized new identifiers to represent novel >>> situations >>> >>> Synthesized what new from what? A proper specific example please.Not a >>> sleight-of-hand handwave. >>> >>> I guarantee you're talking nonsense. Prove me wrong. You should be >>> delighted to discuss - this is the most important thing in AGI - far more >>> important than any of the narrow AI techniques you often discuss in detail. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 2 December 2013 17:59, Piaget Modeler <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>> Gary Drescher's thesis qua book "Made Up Minds". >>> >>> The Schema System synthesized new identifiers to represent novel >>> situations. >>> >>> True Creativity. True Construction. >>> >>> Mike Tintner, this is the meme that you need to surpress: "*a creative >>> algorithm is a physical impossibility*". >>> >>> It is interfering with your reasoning ability, and creating a blind spot >>> for you. >>> >>> ~PM >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 15:41:44 +0000 >>> Subject: Re: [agi] I guess I don't have AGI all figured out. >>> From: [email protected] >>> To: [email protected] >>> >>> "Theoretically, contrary to Tintner's argument, it would be feasible to >>> use CBR to discover and represent truly novel situations. However, this >>> theoretical argument is not easy" >>> >>> One example of this creativity. From anywhere or anyone.. Actual or >>> theoretical. >>> >>> I repeat : a creative algorithm is a physical impossibility like >>> perpetual motion, the Immaculate Conception, transubstantiation of wine >>> into the blood of Christ and other such religious fictions of creativity. >>> And a bleeding obvious impossibility if you could just once turn your >>> attention from the "architecture" of algorithms to the finished buildings >>> they produce.. Then you'd see algorithms can't produce new building >>> blocks.Only the same old Lego buildings. >>> >>> If no one can give even a theoretical example - not the slightest proof >>> of concept - you are engaging in a Giant Wank. >>> >>> >>> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> | >>> 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/303/19999924-4a978ccc> | >>> 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/303/6952829-59a2eca5> | >>> 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/303/19999924-4a978ccc> | >>> 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/303/6952829-59a2eca5> | >>> 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/303/2997756-fc0b9b09> | >> 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/303/6952829-59a2eca5> | > 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
