I meant this was what I said was: My conclusion suggests, that the use of Solmonoff Induction as an ideal for compression or something like MDL is not only unsubstantiated but based on a massive inability to comprehend the idea of a program that runs every possible program. What Matt said was: It is sufficient to find the shortest program consistent with past results, not all programs. The difference is no more than the language-dependent constant... This is an equivocation based on the line you were responding to. You are presenting a related comment as if it were a valid response to what I actually said. That is one reason why I am starting to ignore you. Jim Bromer
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 2:36 PM, Jim Bromer <[email protected]> wrote: > Matt, > I never said that I did not accept the application of the method of > probability, it is just that is has to be applied using logic. Solomonoff > Induction does not meet this standard. From this conclusion, and from other > sources of information, including the acknowledgement of incomputability and > the lack of acceptance in the general mathematical community I feel > comfortable with rejecting the theory of Kolomogrov Complexity as well. > > What I said was: My conclusion suggests, that the use of Solmonoff > Induction as an ideal for compression or something like MDL... > What you said was: It is sufficient to find the shortest program consistent > with past results, not all programs. The difference is no more than the > language-dependent constant... > This is an equivocation based on the line you were responding to. You are > presenting a related comment as if it were a valid response to what I > actually said. That is one reason why I am starting to ignore you. > > Jim Bromer > > On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 1:15 PM, Matt Mahoney <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Jim Bromer wrote: >> > The question was asked whether, given infinite resources could Solmonoff >> Induction work. I made the assumption that it was computable and found that >> it wouldn't work. >> >> On what infinitely powerful computer did you do your experiment? >> >> > My conclusion suggests, that the use of Solmonoff Induction as an ideal >> for compression or something like MDL is not only unsubstantiated but based >> on a massive inability to comprehend the idea of a program that runs every >> possible program. >> >> It is sufficient to find the shortest program consistent with past >> results, not all programs. The difference is no more than the >> language-dependent constant. Legg proved this in the paper that Ben and I >> both pointed you to. Do you dispute his proof? I guess you don't, because >> you didn't respond the last 3 times this was pointed out to you. >> >> > I am comfortable with the conclusion that the claim that Solomonoff >> Induction is an "ideal" for compression or induction or anything else is >> pretty shallow and not based on careful consideration. >> >> I am comfortable with the conclusion that the world is flat because I have >> a gut feeling about it and I ignore overwhelming evidence to the contrary. >> >> > There is a chance that I am wrong >> >> So why don't you drop it? >> >> >> -- Matt Mahoney, [email protected] >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> *From:* Jim Bromer <[email protected]> >> *To:* agi <[email protected]> >> *Sent:* Tue, July 20, 2010 3:10:40 PM >> >> *Subject:* Re: [agi] Comments On My Skepticism of Solomonoff Induction >> >> The question was asked whether, given infinite resources could Solmonoff >> Induction work. I made the assumption that it was computable and found that >> it wouldn't work. It is not computable, even with infinite resources, for >> the kind of thing that was claimed it would do. (I believe that with a >> governance program it might actually be programmable) but it could not be >> used to "predict" (or compute the probability of) a subsequent string >> given some prefix string. Not only is the method impractical it is >> theoretically inane. My conclusion suggests, that the use of Solmonoff >> Induction as an ideal for compression or something like MDL is not only >> unsubstantiated but based on a massive inability to comprehend the idea of a >> program that runs every possible program. >> >> I am comfortable with the conclusion that the claim that Solomonoff >> Induction is an "ideal" for compression or induction or anything else is >> pretty shallow and not based on careful consideration. >> >> There is a chance that I am wrong, but I am confident that there is >> nothing in the definition of Solmonoff Induction that could be used to prove >> it. >> Jim Bromer >> *agi* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/> | >> 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/> | >> 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/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
