yes, as an eighth grader given a make work assignment to keep the class quiet.
On Sun, Jun 22, 2025, at 9:10 PM, Frank Wimberly wrote: > Didn't he know that the sum of the first n integers is n*(n+1)/2 ? > > --- > Frank C. Wimberly > 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, > Santa Fe, NM 87505 > > 505 670-9918 > Santa Fe, NM > > On Sun, Jun 22, 2025, 10:36 AM Prof David West <profw...@fastmail.fm> wrote: >> __ >>> So even though a robot might never replicate the full sensory richness or >>> biochemical subtlety of the human body, it may not need to....Think of >>> calculators: they’re completely clueless about context, but they’ll beat >>> any of us in a mental arithmetic race, every time. >> even a well-handled abacus or slip-stick can do this of course, but yes >> >> Special case contra-examples. When I was consulting in India, several of the >> software developers were proponents of "Vedic Math" procedures derived from >> Vedic Scripture. Demonstrated ability to add columns of 10+digit numbers >> spoken to them. Correct results much faster than if you had to manually >> enter them into a calculator. >> >> And Gauss "added the numbers from 1-100) in far less time than it would have >> required to enter them into calculator and press the + key. >> >> davew >> >> >> On Sat, Jun 21, 2025, at 4:17 PM, steve smith wrote: >>> Pieter wrote: >>>> Just one thought to toss into the mix: humans didn’t evolve to do >>>> astrophysics, drive Ferraris, or detect sarcasm on Twitter.... >>> The human *genome* did not evolve *specifically* to do all these things, >>> however at some point, our facility for symbolic language and abstraction >>> *did* evolve to support and enhance those more fundamental needs. It is >>> on top of that symbolic abstraction where *culture* began to evolve and >>> this is where our ability to do astrophysics/ferraris/sarcasm emerges. >>> And it might be apt to notice that AI is much closer to driving ferraris, >>> doing astrophysics and detecting (or generating) sarcasm that it is at >>> being an effective hunter-gatherer on the >>> tundra/savanna/jungle/boreal-forest. >>>> Now, if we set out to design a robot to function in today’s environments — >>>> say, hospitals, homes, or corporate boardrooms — we’re working with a very >>>> different set of goals. ... >>> If our goal is to replace *one more* set of skills or abilities, then it is >>> correct that we don't "need all that". It does seem that a hallmark of >>> modern human activity (neolithic forward?) has been to replace ourselves, >>> one feature at a time. Lithics to replace (enhance) our teeth/claws, >>> cooking to replace (enhance) our digestive abilities, animal husbandry to >>> replace/enhance our brute-labor and translate low-grade photosynthesis to >>> human-digestables (turning grass and leaves into milk, meat, eggs, blood). >>> Wheels and levers and sails and hulls and millstones and kilns and forges >>> and hammers and anvils and looms and ... and rocket-ships and a >>> dyson-sphere-of-computronium all represent a scaffolding of escalating >>> replacements for the things we did with our own biochemistry (from hair and >>> nails to lymphocytes and neurons)... >>>> So even though a robot might never replicate the full sensory richness or >>>> biochemical subtlety of the human body, it may not need to....Think of >>>> calculators: they’re completely clueless about context, but they’ll beat >>>> any of us in a mental arithmetic race, every time. >>> even a well-handled abacus or slip-stick can do this of course, but yes >>>> I wouldn’t bet on a human-equivalent robot appearing next year — but ten >>>> years? Maybe. Especially if we stop trying to replicate every biological >>>> quirk and instead design for function. And when I say “function,” I mean >>>> not just doing what a human can do, but doing what the job needs — which >>>> is often a very different thing. >>> The point, I would claim is that we aspire (with AI, starting with Golems >>> and Frankenstein's monster and enlightenment age humanoid mechanicals) to >>> replace our "generalist" abilities. Many domestic animals have been >>> adopted/bred/trained to be "generalists" around a large portion of our >>> needs, whether it be converting simple carbs into high grade fats/proteins >>> for us, or hauling burdens, or even (think elephants) delicately >>> manipulating things way to heavy for us. Some even have diverged from >>> direct, immediate response to our needs to more abstract needs we have >>> (e.g. show animals whose functional abilities might never be exercised >>> outside of the training/show-rooms). >>>> Take Demis Hassabis’ current project: trying to simulate a single >>>> biological cell to improve drug discovery. Sounds simple — it’s just one >>>> cell — but it’s turning out to be a mammoth challenge. Meanwhile, a useful >>>> robot doesn’t need even one biological cell. It just needs actuators, >>>> sensors, and some reasonably clever code. This illustrates a broader >>>> point: biological systems are complex because evolution took the long >>>> road. Engineering can often take a shortcut. >>> And while I am very much a fan of engineering, I do believe Evolution to be >>> more than "less efficient Engineering". AI/ML has been an effort in >>> *reverse-engineering* our greatest cognitive abilities, up until the recent >>> generations of "model-less modeling" that in fact seems to be to try to >>> reverse-engineer evolution (exemplified by genetic algorithms and neural >>> nets and ???) >>> >>>> >>>> So yes, the human body is a marvel — a product of billions of years of >>>> trial and error. But that doesn’t mean it’s the most efficient solution >>>> for every task. It’s just the one that happened to work well enough to >>>> keep our ancestors from being eaten. >>>> >>>> After all, birds fly beautifully. But when we wanted to fly, we didn’t >>>> grow feathers. We built jets. >>> In a certain sense yes, but not particularly in virtually every other >>> sense? I have had lucid dreams about flying since I was very young, >>> spanning many forms from sailing/soaring to flapping, to pumping my arms as >>> with a hydraulic jack to telekineticing, swinging from vines or >>> spider-man-shot webs, and more recently to following stellar/planetary >>> geodesics with my intention, spreading my electromagnetic pinfeathers in >>> the solar/wind/magnetic fields of the sun/planets/moons/belts/rings/clouds. >>> But no jets... or any mechanical contrivance really... even >>> icarus/daedelus wings-o-wax... >>> >>> <aviation tangent> >>> >>>> While I have flown a (vintage) light plane, even through minor aerobatics, >>>> and ridden hundreds? of thousands of miles in commercial jets, none of it >>>> really matches the experiences I *aspire*/*imaginate* to have in those >>>> dreams... I can't (until DaveW or maybe Glen turns me on to the right >>>> entheogen) project my spirit into the Ravens frolicing on the canyon edge >>>> or the bats echolocating their way through a flux of airborne foodstuffs. >>>> >>>> But yes, Jets, hypersonics, space rockets, interplanetary bussard ramjets, >>>> ultra-lights, gyrocopters, etc. They are marvels and each in their own >>>> way more "capable" than any given bird/species and there are probably >>>> unpiloted winged vehicles which will rival the Wandering Albatross reputed >>>> to spend 95% of their time in the air and expending order 2x their basal >>>> metabolic rate. See Gossamer Condor/Albatross/Penguin and note that >>>> Aerodynamic Engineer on the first two projects, Peter LIssaman hung at SFx >>>> with us for a while? >>>> >>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_human-powered_aircraft >>>>> >>>> How soon will we have a Lissaman/MacReady equivalent AI (throw in >>>> pedal-pusher Bryan Allen for good measure)? Or leonardo DaV or >>>> Archimedes, or... ? Can they exist/arise/emerge without the larger >>>> culture that spawned them? Maybe we can identify to an AI their >>>> achievements and reverse engineer their solutions, but can we frame the >>>> context that lead them to pursue those challenges. >>>> >>>> I *suspect* that if given the opportunity/motivation that suites of AI/ML >>>> agents might well develop minimalist human-scaled prosthetics so that I >>>> (my grandchildren) can literally have those experiences direct. Some >>>> proprioception/motion-platform/haptics added to visual/auditory synthetic >>>> sensoria and even I might be soaring virtually over the surface of mars or >>>> through the braided rings of Saturn as-in-my dreams? >>>> >>> </tangent> >>> >>> And in the immortal *Tears in Rain* words of Roy Batty: >>> >>>> **"I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.* >>>> Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. >>>> I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate.* >>>> >>>> **All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.** >>>> >>>> **Time to die."** >>>> >>> >>> >>> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / >>> ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-.. >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom >>> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam >>> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >>> archives: 5/2017 thru present >>> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ >>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >>> >>> >>> *Attachments:* >>> • OpenPGP_0xD5BAF94F88AFFA63.asc >>> • OpenPGP_signature.asc >> >> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / >> ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-.. >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom >> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam >> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >> archives: 5/2017 thru present >> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ >> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ > .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... > --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-.. > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom > https://bit.ly/virtualfriam > to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > archives: 5/2017 thru present > https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ > 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >
.- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-.. FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
