Deutsch:"in regard to AGIs, like any other entities with creativity, we have to forget almost all existing connotations of the word ‘programming’. To treat AGIs like any other computer programs would constitute brainwashing, slavery, and tyranny. And cruelty to children, too, for ‘programming’ an already-running AGI, unlike all other programming, constitutes education."
You dismissed Deutsch's article - argued that all we need is more powerful computers. Deutsch is calling for a revolution in computing, as am I. And I am offering an elaborate philosophy of what that creative revolution entails. You have persistently called for more of the same - for tweaking rather than smashing the paradigm and are getting nowhere in terms of real AGI progress. You will not find one major technological revolution in which the existing paradigm has not been fundamentally broken, and in which existing ideas (like yours here re algos) of what is and is not possible are transformed. Your ignorance of technological history is astonishing. But I'll butt out now. Have your discussion. On 3 December 2013 09:01, Ben Goertzel <[email protected]> wrote: > > Deutsch, unlike you (Tintner) understands what algorithms and computers > are... > > He thinks that human-like general intelligence is possible using > algorithms on digital computers, just using different kinds of algorithms > than folks are currently pursuing... > > He might think that non-algorithm-focused *ideas* are useful for getting > inspiration for designing the right kinds of algorithms > > But his perspective is coherent, whereas yours is not. Because he is > technically conversant with the theory of algorithms and computers, whereas > you are not. > > But your ignorance is not the problem. The problem is your ignorance of > your own ignorance, combined with your insistently loudmouthed nature ;p ;) > ... > > -- Ben > > > On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 4:55 PM, tintner michael > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> BEn: The obvious inspiration for this question is Mike Tintner. While he >> has a certain sincerity to him, nevertheless, he is basically a troll on >> this list in the Internet sense. He thinks everyone researching in the AGI >> field is badly misguided and tells us so, repetitively, over and over. >> And he really doesn't understand the basic concepts of computer science -- >> he thinks there are "non-algorithmic computer programs", or ways to operate >> computers non-algorithmically... which really is not true if you take any >> standard definition of "algorithm" . >> >> Have your discussion. But as I've pointed out repeatedly, what you are >> saying about algorithms is not true - you disagree radically with Deutsch >> and others that I have evidenced. And you seem quite incapable of >> registering that point - or recognising that there is a fundamentally >> alternative approach to AGI to your own and that of your colleagues -and >> that that alternative approach is continually evolving. The alternative BTW >> is ACI - the recognition that this field is about Artifcial Creative >> Intelligence - the General is interdependent, but Creativity is primary - >> and you have to no answer to algos' incapacity for creativity (basically >> Deutsch's point too). >> >> >> On 3 December 2013 08:03, Ben Goertzel <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> I'm curious how many people think we should start a policy of banning >>> obvious trolls from this email list? >>> >>> I don't have an extremely strong opinion one way or the other. However, >>> I note that the presence of so much trolling does cause me to avoid looking >>> at the list most of the time, because my default assumption is that the >>> average post will not be interesting... >>> >>> The obvious inspiration for this question is Mike Tintner. While he has >>> a certain sincerity to him, nevertheless, he is basically a troll on this >>> list in the Internet sense. He thinks everyone researching in the AGI >>> field is badly misguided and tells us so, repetitively, over and over. >>> And he really doesn't understand the basic concepts of computer science -- >>> he thinks there are "non-algorithmic computer programs", or ways to operate >>> computers non-algorithmically... which really is not true if you take any >>> standard definition of "algorithm" ... >>> >>> Occasionally Tintner has spurred interesting discussions. But mostly he >>> just says the same boring, misunderstanding-based stuff over and over >>> again... >>> >>> Anyway, I can go either way on this personally, but I'm curious what >>> other list members think. Should we ban Tintner and any other similar >>> trolls who emerge, or let them use the list as their trolling-ground? >>> >>> Note: I absolutely would NOT want to start banning people for believing >>> AGI is impossible and saying so, or positing unpopular ideas, or saying >>> everyone in the field is misguided, etc. But being sooooo repetitive with >>> the same exact points over and over again -- to the point where you're the >>> most active poster on the list, yet you don't really understand the core >>> technical concepts underlying the field the list exists to discuss -- this >>> verges from nonconformist thinking into trolling, IMO... >>> >>> Curious for others' thoughts.. ? >>> >>> -- Ben >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 10:29 AM, tintner michael < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> 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> >>>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/212726-deec6279> | >>>> Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription >>>> <http://www.listbox.com> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Ben Goertzel, PhD >>> http://goertzel.org >>> >>> "In an insane world, the sane man must appear to be insane". -- Capt. >>> James T. Kirk >>> *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/303/212726-deec6279> | >> Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription >> <http://www.listbox.com> >> > > > > -- > Ben Goertzel, PhD > http://goertzel.org > > "In an insane world, the sane man must appear to be insane". -- Capt. > James T. Kirk > *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
