But you can not devote yourself to evaluate truth A solipsist robot is a dead robot. an exceptic robot is a almost dead robot. The other robots will not collaborate with a robot that spend so much time and is unreliable for collaboration. other robots will break the robot apart while it is evaluating the certainty of the first truth..
Your truths must be operational from the first moment in order to create plans for coordination with other robots. You as programmer know that your robot will be involved in circles, some of them very intimate others not so intimate. The game to play is survival, not accuracy. 2012/12/18 meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> > On 12/18/2012 8:05 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: > >> Suppose that you are in charge of the software of a social robot. I mean >> a robot that live with other robots that collaborate to solve problems. >> These robots must repair themselves, with pieces that are located in the >> field. these pieces are scarce or they are not for free, and some groups of >> robots want your own pieces for them, so finally the robots arrange >> themselves in groups of collaborators that try to fabricate pieces and >> protect them from the attacks of other groups. Things become more >> complicated, since, for better defense and/or fabrication and/or attack the >> groups become bigger, and some subgroups are formed iinside, in order to >> have privileged access to valuable pieces in detriment of the other members >> of the big group. >> >> At a point in the programing, you have to deal with comunication of each >> robot with the fellow robots. As a result of this comunication, you must >> evaluate if what is communicated to you is true of false. If true it is >> hold in the list of true statements. If not, it is rejected. The true >> statements will be used for the elaboration of social behaviours intended >> to obtain pieces and to maintain the group of collaborators, the >> fabrication, ownership, and maybe robbery of new pieces for the future. Or >> else, the group will die, the robot will die and its lists of truths too. >> >> Since you know that finally the social robots will end in arrangements of >> collaborators in the way I described above, T How would you design the >> evaluator iof true and false statements.? >> > > An interesting and complex problem. You wouldn't just evaluate some as > 'true' and discard the others. You'd keep all (or at least many) of them > and assign them degrees of credence according to criterea like: Who said > it? Has he been truthful before? Who would belief in the statement help or > hurt? How does it comport with other statements? Can I check any part of it > independently?... > > Brent > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To post to this group, send email to > everything-list@googlegroups.**com<everything-list@googlegroups.com> > . > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscribe@ > **googlegroups.com <everything-list%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/** > group/everything-list?hl=en<http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en> > . > > -- Alberto. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
