Yeah, both social media posts *and* poetry are a low bar. Machine generated 
prose is more difficult, I expect. There are good examples from GPT3. But I 
don't know of any other algorithm that does a decent job. So I doubt the same 
techniques Gabriel uses to generate poetry and social media posts would work to 
generate *some* of our postings, particularly the long-winded amongst us.

My own play with MegaHAL generated obvious garbage.

On 9/1/21 10:25 AM, Prof David West wrote:
> Richard Gabriel has created software that can generate poetry in the style of 
> any poet. It also generates poetry that passes the Turing test in that 
> experts are unable to distinguish between machine generated poetry and human 
> generated poetry. He demoed this at an annual meeting of poets at Warren 
> Wilson College (where Richard got his MFA).
> 
> I am certain he could use his program to create FRIAM posts that could 
> emulate any of us.
> 
> He also, for IBM on a DoD contract, created a NL program that monitored 
> social media posts, detected those deemed inimical to government interests 
> (e.g setting up a flash mob to protest the visit of a political personage), 
> and generate counter postings (e.g., moving the mob to a pig farm instead of 
> the county court house because "inside sources" confirm the personage changed 
> her itinerary).
> 
> Of course social media postings create a pretty low bar for an AI to be 
> convincing.
> 
> davew
> 
> 
> On Wed, Sep 1, 2021, at 10:33 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
>>
>> If we collected years of FRIAM archives and train it with a recycle GAN, I 
>> think it would probably be possible to generate plausible sentences of each 
>> other.  To the extent we pay attention to what we say at all; so it might 
>> not be the hard to fake really.   I think we could get the basic intent of 
>> all the regulars, if not the details of their writing (which the GAN would 
>> get).   I’ve often wished for a ML avatar that could stand in for me on Zoom 
>> meetings, so I could go play with my dog or go running or whatever.
>>
>>  
>>
>> *From:* Friam <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of 
>> *[email protected]
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 1, 2021 9:21 AM
>> *To:* 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' 
>> <[email protected]>
>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] aversive learning
>>
>>  
>>
>> Would I pass the turing test if I could, by my emails, convince you that I 
>> was Dave?
>>
>>  
>>
>> Or is that just the dave Test.  Would I pass the Turing test if I could 
>> convince you that I was Turing?
>>
>>  
>>
>> Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men!
>>
>>  
>>
>> n
>>
>>  
>>
>> Nick Thompson
>>
>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>
>> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ 
>> <https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/>
>>
>>  
>>
>> *From:* Friam <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> 
>> *On Behalf Of *Marcus Daniels
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 1, 2021 11:26 AM
>> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>>
>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] aversive learning
>>
>>  
>>
>> I’m already convinced Dave is bot.  I know I am.
>>
>>  
>>
>> https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2021/08/dead-internet-theory-wrong-but-feels-true/619937/
>>  
>> <https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2021/08/dead-internet-theory-wrong-but-feels-true/619937/>
>>
>>  
>>
>> *From:* Friam <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> 
>> *On Behalf Of *Marcus Daniels
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 1, 2021 8:23 AM
>> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>>
>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] aversive learning
>>
>>  
>>
>> Culture is online now, didn’t you hear?
>>
>>  
>>
>> *From:* Friam <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> 
>> *On Behalf Of *Prof David West
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 1, 2021 8:12 AM
>> *To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] aversive learning
>>
>>  
>>
>> Glen quoted BC Smith:
>>
>>  
>>
>> /"What does all this mean in the case of AIs and computer systems generally? 
>> Perhaps at least this: that it is hard to see how synthetic systems could be 
>> trained in the ways of judgment except by gradually, incrementally, and 
>> systematically enmeshed in normative practices that engage with the world 
>> and that involve thick engagement with teachers ('elders'), who can steadily 
>> develop and inculcate not just 'moral sensibility' but also intellectual 
>> appreciation of intentional commitment to the world."/
>>
>>  
>>
>>  I read from (or into) this statement a position I have held via AI since I 
>> did my masters thesis in CS (AI) — computers cannot be intelligent in any 
>> general sense until and unless they participate in human culture. We 
>> automatically and non-consciously "enculturate" (normative practices that 
>> engage the world and involve thick engagement) our children.
>>
>>  
>>
>> This is NOT education. Education is nothing more than a pale shadow of 
>> enculturation. Not more than 10% of the 'knowledge' in your head (knowledge 
>> about what to do and why and when and variations according to circumstance 
>> and context ....) was learned via any kind of formal education or training 
>> and yet it is absolutely essential and is the foundation for comprehending 
>> and utilizing the 10% you did learn formally.
>>
>>  
>>
>> Until we can enculturate our computers, we will never achieve general AI (or 
>> even any complete specialized AI.
>>
>>  
>>
>> davew
>>
>>  
>>
>>  
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 1, 2021, at 8:28 AM, uǝlƃ ☤>$ wrote:
>>
>> > 
>>
>> > UK judge orders rightwing extremist to read classic literature or face 
>>
>> > prison
>>
>> > 
>> >https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/01/judge-orders-rightwing-extremist-to-read-classic-literature-or-face-prison
>> > 
>> ><https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/01/judge-orders-rightwing-extremist-to-read-classic-literature-or-face-prison>
>>
>> > 
>>
>> > I know several liberals who agree with the righties that vaccine and 
>>
>> > mask mandates are bad, though not for the same reasons. Righties yap 
>>
>> > about fascism and limits to their "freedom". But the liberals talk 
>>
>> > about how mandates just push the righties further into their foxholes, 
>>
>> > preventing collegial conversation.
>>
>> > 
>>
>> > So the story above is an interesting situation in similar style. 
>>
>> > Renee', to this day, hates Shakespeare because she was forced to 
>>
>> > memorize Romeo and Juliet as a kid. Of course, she doesn't hate 
>>
>> > Shakespeare, because she hasn't read much Shakespeare. She just 
>>
>> > *thinks* she hates it because of this "mandate" she suffered under. 
>>
>> > This court mandated "literature therapy" being imposed on this kid 
>>
>> > could work, if he can read it sympathetically. But if he can't, if he 
>>
>> > simply reads it "syntactically", what will he learn?
>>
>> > 
>>
>> > BC Smith, in his book "The Promise of AI", channels Steels & Brooks [ψ] 
>>
>> > in writing:
>>
>> > 
>>
>> > "What does all this mean in the case of AIs and computer systems 
>>
>> > generally? Perhaps at least this: that it is hard to see how synthetic 
>>
>> > systems could be trained in the ways of judgment except by gradually, 
>>
>> > incrementally, and systematically enmeshed in normative practices that 
>>
>> > engage with the world and that involve thick engagement with teachers 
>>
>> > ('elders'), who can steadily develop and inculcate not just 'moral 
>>
>> > sensibility' but also intellectual appreciation of intentional 
>>
>> > commitment to the world."
>>
>> > 
>>
>> > If we think of this kid, Ben John, as an AI, what will he learn by 
>>
>> > mandating he read Dickens? Similarly, what are the mandate protesters 
>>
>> > learning from our mandates? Stupidity should be painful. And the 
>>
>> > court's reaction to this kid's stupidity, the pain of reading Pride and 
>>
>> > Prejudice, should teach that kid something. But which is the more 
>>
>> > dangerous stupidity? Which stupidity runs the risk of a more 
>>
>> > catastrophic outcome? Avoiding the vaccine? Or mandating vaccination?
>>
>> > 
>>
>> > 
>>
>> > [ψ] https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351001885 
>> > <https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351001885>
>>
>> > 
>>
>> > -- 
>>
>> > ☤>$ uǝlƃ
>>



-- 
☤>$ uǝlƃ

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

Reply via email to