Le 26-sept.-07, à 14:40, Wei Dai a écrit :

> So where does this chain of thought lead us? I think UD+ASSA, while 
> flawed,
> can serve as a kind of stepping stone towards a more general 
> rationality.

I would suggest to use the Hal Finney "UDist" term, instead of UD for 
helping the new people on the list to not confuse the UD = Universal 
Dovetailer, with the UDist = Universal Distribution. But this is a 
detail. Roughly speaking I agree with you.

> Somehow UD+ASSA is more intuitively appealing, whereas truly 
> generalized
> rationality looks very alien to us. I'm not sure any of us can really
> practice the latter, even if we can accept it philosophically. But 
> perhaps
> our descendents
> can.

This seems rather mysterious for me.

> One danger I see with UD+ASSA is we'll program it into an AI, and the
> AI will be forever stuck with the idea that non-computable phenomenon 
> can't
> exist,
> no matter what evidence it might observe.

And this is still more mysterious. An "AI" as simple as the already 
existing "Peano Arithmetic" has enough cognitive abilities to 
understand that non-computable "phenomenon" have to exist (relatively 
to itself).
I will say more when I come back on Church thesis.



You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to