Mr. LaMuth,
You are correct, sir. I should not have called you a patent troll. It was not
only harsh, it was inaccurate. I was under the impression the term applied to a
person or company holding a patent said person or company was not also
developing, or imminently planning to develop, as a product. According to
Wikipedia, however, this is not the correct definition of the term
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_troll). Please accept my sincerest apologies.
You do, however, appear to be a "non-practicing entity (NPE)." Wikipedia
defines this term as "...a patent owner who does not manufacture or use the
patented invention" (same article). The patent you cited was first applied for
in 2000 (actually in 1999 if we count the provisional patent) and approved in
2003. This is hardly a “recently issued” patent as you claimed in your initial
post to this list. Since you did not mention any applicable existing products,
or products currently under development (or even claimed to have a
proof-of-concept prototype working and available for examination by interested
parties), I think you can see where a reasonable person would have cause to
believe your post may have had some other purpose.
As to your claim to have initially posted here looking for “...aid in
developing...” your invention, I must, also, assume you are being sincere. But,
there is nothing in your initial posting to this mailing list that supports this
assumption in any way, shape or form. There is no mention of having acquired
any funding, no mention of a job opening, nor is there mention of any intent on
your part to seek a development partner (individual or company).
That being said, I would be happy to look over your patent in detail and to give
you my written, expert opinion on (a) whether it can actually be defended
against challenges to its claim(s) and (b) whether it is possible, using current
hardware and software tools, to actually construct a working prototype from the
patent description. I have just two requirements: (1) You must agree to allow
me to publish my analysis, unmodified, on the Internet (I will gladly also post,
in the same location, any comments you may have regarding my analysis) and, (b)
you must agree to assist in this analysis by providing any additional
information I may need to complete the task. We can communicate for this
purpose via email (this will also provide a “log” of our collaboration).
I assure you I am completely sincere in making this offer. I have charged
clients up to $250 per hour for similar services. Since I feel truly remorseful
about incorrectly intimating you were a patent troll, you get this one on me.
;-) Let me know if you're interested. I have everything I need to get started
right away.
Cheers,
Brad
John LaMuth wrote:
Assuming I'm a Troll is pretty harsh, isnt it ?
I just wished to pitch my invention to SI in hopes of
aid in developing this ... Along the lines of "friendly" AI.
This innovation is the 1st affect-
ive language analyzer incorporating ethical/motivational
terms, serving in the role of interactive computer
interface. It enables a computer to reason and speak in an
ethical fashion, serving in roles specifying sound human
judgement: such as public relations or security functions.
This innovation is formally based on a multi-level
hierarchy of the traditional groupings of virtues, values,
and ideals, collectively arranged as subsets within a
hierarchy of metaperspectives - as partially depicted below.
Glory--Prudence Honor--Justice
Providence--Faith Liberty--Hope
Grace--Beauty Free-will--Truth
Tranquility--Ecstasy Equality--Bliss
Dignity--Temperance Integrity--Fortitude
Civility--Charity Austerity--Decency
Magnanim.--Goodness Equanimity--Wisdom
Love--Joy Peace--Harmony
The systematic organization underlying this ethical
hierarchy allows for extreme efficiency in programming,
eliminating much of the associated redundancy, providing
a precise determination of motivational parameters at
issue during a given verbal interchange.
This AI platform is organized as a tandem-nested expert
system, composed of a primary affective-language analyzer
overseen by a master control-unit (that coordinates the
verbal interactions over real time). Through an elaborate
matching procedure, the precise motivational parameters
are accurately determined (defined as the passive-monitoring
mode). This basic determination, in turn, serves as the
basis for a response repertoire tailored to the computer
(the true AI simulation mode). This innovation is completely
novel in its ability to simulate emotionally charged language:
an achievement that has previously eluded AI researchers due
to the lack of an adequate model of motivation in general.
As such, it represents a **pure language simulation,** effectively
bypassing many of the limitations plaguing current robotic
research. Affiliated potential applications extend to the
roles of switchboard/receptionist and personal
assistant/companion (in a time-share mode).
Opinions ?
John L
http://www.ethicalvalues.com
http://www.ethicalvalues.info
http://www.emotionchip.net
http://www.global-solutions.org
http://www.world-peace.org
http://www.angelfire.com/rnb/fairhaven/schematics.html
http://www.angelfire.com/rnb/fairhaven/behaviorism.html
http://www.forebrain.org
http://www.charactervalues.com
http://www.charactervalues.org
http://www.charactervalues.net
----- Original Message ----- From: "Brad Paulsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 12:35 PM
Subject: Re: [agi] US PATENT ISSUED for the TEN ETHICAL LAWS OF ROBOTICS
Matt,
Never underestimate the industriousness of a PATENT TROLL. He's
already been granted a new patent for the same concept, except
(apparently, I haven't read the patent yet, this time for "an ethical
chip"). Patent #7236963 (awarded in 2007) for the "emotion chip."
Don't worry, it's as indefensible as the first one. Same random
buzzword generator, different title.
The problem is giving one of these morons a technology patent is like
giving an ADHD kid a loaded gun. You know they're just looking to use
it as blackmail for some quick royalty fees. The posting here was, no
doubt, for "intimidation purposes." Of course, somebody ought to tell
him the AGI crowd doesn't have much use for a solution to the
"ethical" artificial intelligence problem (whatever the hell that
is). Indeed, even after he tells us what it is, it still doesn't make
any sense. And I quote from the (first) patent's Abstract "A new
model of motivational behavior, described as a ten-level
metaperspectival hierarchy of..."
Say what? There is no such word as "metaperspectival." Not in
English, at least. Yet, that's the word he uses to "define" his
invention. But, it gets better...
"...ethical terms, serves as the foundation for an ethical simulation
of artificial intelligence." Well, I'm glad he intends to conduct his
simulation ethically. I think what he really meant, however, was “a
simulation of ethical artificial intelligence.” He does get half a
grammar point for using the correct article (“an”) before “ethical.”
You don't see that much these days. But, ah... we have another problem
here. You see, artificial intelligence IS ALREADY a simulation. In
particular, it is a simulation of human intelligence. Hence the word
"artificial." At least, that's the idea. Does he really mean his
patent applies to a simulation of a simulation? Given that most
existing AI software is computationally intensive and gasping for
breath most of the time, that's got to be one slow-ass AI invention!
Again, from the Abstract of the first patent...
"This AI system is organized as a tandem, nested...” Sigh. Where I
come from (planet earth), tandem and nested are mutually exclusive
modifiers. It's either tandem (i.e., “along side of” or “behind each
other”) or it's nested (i.e., “inside of”). Can't be both at the same
time. Sorry.
Continuing, still in the Abstract...
“...overseen by a master control unit – expert system (coordinating
the motivational interchanges over real time).”
OMG. Let me see if I have this straight. He has succeeded in
patenting a simulation of a simulation with a “master control unit”
that is, itself, another simulation. The only thing that contraption
will do in real time is sit there looking stupid. That's presuming he
could make it work which, as far as I can tell by scanning his patent,
is right up there with the probability we'll solve the energy crises
and the greenhouse effect using cold fusion.
I have a good dozen of these "gems," most of them from the Abstract
alone. It gets REALLY weird when you read the patent description where
he talks about how this invention solves the "affective language
understanding" problem heretofore unsolved. News Alert: the entire
NLP "problem" has yet to be solved (after 50 of trying by some of the
best minds in the world).
I have a PDF version of the newer patent (#7236963) which I will send
(off-list) to anyone interested. Be advised, it's 3MB+ in size.
Alternatively, you can read about it (see a picture of Mr. LaMuth, and
download the PDF) at www.emotionchip.net. I also have a PDF version
of the other, earlier, patent he holds (#6587846) – the supposed
“recently issued” patent (actually, granted in 2003). I will also
send this off-list to anyone interested (it's only about 1.3MB).
Frankly, the reason these PDFs are so large is that every page is a
graphic image. The documents contain no data stored as text (that I
could find). This is pretty typical with U.S. Patent Office
documents. Somebody there really likes (or liked) the TIFF image
format. Unfortunately, this makes the Search function in Acrobat (or
FoxIt Reader) completely useless.
BTW, this guy apparently uses a dialup ISP. Yeah. State of the art.
Sheesh!
Cheers,
Brad
Matt Mahoney wrote:
This is a real patent, unfortunately...
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PALL&RefSrch=yes&Query=PN%2F6587846
But I think it will expire before anyone has the technology to
implement it. :-)
-- Matt Mahoney, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription:
https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription:
https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=108809214-a0d121
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
