(",)
تجنب. القتل والاغتصاب واستعباد الآخرين
Avoid; murder, rape and enslavement of others
-----Original Message-----
From: archytas <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Mon, 02 Mar 2015 10:12 AM
Subject: Re: Mind's Eye Re: Götterdämmerung
Just thought you might have sent it.
On Monday, March 2, 2015 at 9:04:32 AM UTC, Gabby wrote:
>
> Not my problem. Sunshine here.
>
> Am Montag, 2. März 2015 schrieb archytas :
>
>> A blizzard just started here as I read that Gabby. Must be a sign. The
>> machines don't get god, though they could work on such as AI religious
>> guides.
>>
>> On Monday, March 2, 2015 at 8:04:22 AM UTC, Gabby wrote:
>>>
>>> Which is why I find the God view so interesting. All rhetorics and
>>> comfort zone exodus talking automatically ends here.
>>>
>>> Am Montag, 2. März 2015 schrieb archytas :
>>>
>>>> Humans tend to think they do argument well - even those failed by
>>>> schools. It's interesting most people have little clue what argument
>>>> itself is about. Few get very far when asked to explain how they argue
>>>> and
>>>> the 'smarter' fall back on some simple rhetoric training they had on
>>>> fallacies and the like.
>>>> Argumentation is a highly interdisciplinary field with links to
>>>> psychology, linguistics, philosophy, legal theory, and formal logic. Since
>>>> the advent of the computer age, formal models of argument have been
>>>> materialized in different systems that implement — or at least support —
>>>> creation, evaluation, and judgement of arguments. Dung's idea of
>>>> evaluating
>>>> arguments on an abstract level by taking only their inter-relationships
>>>> into account, not only has been shown to underlie many of the earlier
>>>> approaches for argumentation, but also uniformly captures several
>>>> non-monotonic logics. This located Argumentation as a sub-discipline of
>>>> Artificial Intelligence. .
>>>>
>>>> One particular feature of abstract argumentation frameworks is their
>>>> simple structure. In fact, abstract argumentation frameworks are just
>>>> directed graphs where vertices play the role of arguments and edges
>>>> indicate a certain conflict between the two connected arguments. These
>>>> argumentation frameworks are usually derived during an instantiation
>>>> process where structured arguments are investigated with respect to their
>>>> ability to contradict other such arguments; the actual notion of
>>>> “contradicting” can be instantiated in many different forms. Having
>>>> generated the framework in such a way, the process of
>>>> “conflict-resolution”, i.e., the search for jointly acceptable sets of
>>>> arguments, is then delegated to semantics which operate on the abstract
>>>> level. Thus, semantics for argumentation frameworks have also been
>>>> referred
>>>> to as calculi of opposition.
>>>>
>>>> Stripping our argument for easier translation is not the way we are
>>>> going in our chats with machines and with humans still leaves problems
>>>> with
>>>> the knowledge and dispositions of the recipients - including whether they
>>>> will try at all, especially if a world-view they are comfortable with is
>>>> challenged.
>>>>
>>>> On Monday, March 2, 2015 at 5:22:19 AM UTC, archytas wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Most human communication probably isn't directly conscious, so maybe
>>>>> there's some unconscious hope. Something of what Gabby said on 'wobbly'
>>>>> goes on in the machines. Fuzzy Description Logics (DLs) can be used to
>>>>> represent and reason with vague knowledge. This family of logical
>>>>> formalisms is very diverse, each member being characterized by a specific
>>>>> choice of constructors,axioms, and triangular norms, which are used to
>>>>> specify the semantics.They form the base language for many large-scale
>>>>> knowledge bases, like Snomed CT and the Gene Ontology, but their largest
>>>>> success to date is the language OWL as the standard ontology language for
>>>>> the Semantic Web. DLs essentially allow to state relations between
>>>>> concepts, which represent subsets of a specific domain containing exactly
>>>>> those domain elements that share certain properties. Roles correspond to
>>>>> binary relations that allow to state connections between concepts.
>>>>> In their classical form, however, DLs are not well-suited for
>>>>> representing and reasoning with the vagueness and imprecision that are
>>>>> endemic to many knowledge domains, e.g. in the bio-medical fields. One of
>>>>> the most common symptoms of diseases is the presence of fever, which is
>>>>> characterized by a high body
>>>>> temperature. Clearly, it is not possible to* precisely* distinguish
>>>>> high body temperatures from non-high body temperatures. In order to
>>>>> appropriately represent this knowledge, it is necessary to use a
>>>>> formalism
>>>>> capable of handling imprecision. Fuzzy variants of DLs have been
>>>>> introduced
>>>>> as a means of handling imprecise
>>>>> terminological knowledge. This is achieved by interpreting concepts as
>>>>> fuzzy sets. In a nutshell, a fuzzy set associates with every element of
>>>>> the
>>>>> universe a value from the interval [0, 1], which expresses its degree of
>>>>> membership to the set. This makes it possible to express, e.g. that 38◦C
>>>>> is
>>>>> a high body temperature to
>>>>> degree 0.7, while 39◦C belongs to the same concept with degree 1.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course, one hardly puts this kind of linguistic and mathematical
>>>>> effort in with humans. One cannot reliably determine whether they are
>>>>> switched on or merely programmed like an attack dog with a spleen
>>>>> problem.
>>>>> I can see the point in translation for the machine, but humans are so
>>>>> stupid they choose the wrong end of the stick, even when correctly marked.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The ability to manage vague and imprecise knowledge is a desired
>>>>> feature of intelligent systems to be used in the biological and medical
>>>>> domains, among many others.Studying the complexity of reasoning with
>>>>> different fuzzy DLs allows us to discern which of these may be suitable
>>>>> formalisms for implementing a fuzzy knowledge representation and
>>>>> reasoning
>>>>> system. Anyone who thinks the machines aren't as smart as us should
>>>>> compare
>>>>> argument here with the chats one can have with a modern database.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://lat.inf.tu-dresden.de/research/papers/2015/BoDP-AI15.pdf
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Monday, March 2, 2015 at 4:12:37 AM UTC, Chris Jenkins wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, I'm sure they eventually will. The Singularity and all that. I
>>>>>> wonder if we'll achieve the same level of communication growth.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 7:24 PM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Quatsch is rather tame and an interesting example in your terms
>>>>>>> Chris. I heard Schmarrn more often (Austria). Inflexion, tone and the
>>>>>>> rest would be key - just as rubbish could be a nice response to a fairy
>>>>>>> tale story or rather nasty as from a finger-wagging harridan teacher.
>>>>>>> Machines can interpret these these things over time.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 7:08:56 PM UTC, Chris Jenkins wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Brilliant! I'll be using that from now on.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 2:05 PM, gabbydott <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I don't know, but I would translate it as "Quatsch". Equally
>>>>>>>>> wobbly sound. :)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2015-03-01 20:01 GMT+01:00 Chris Jenkins <
>>>>>>>>> [email protected]>:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Ah, but I never belittled your language competence, Gabby! What I
>>>>>>>>>> said in American English was that I wondered sometimes if I missed
>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>> intended meaning in the translation. And, inputting my American
>>>>>>>>>> English
>>>>>>>>>> into Google Translated German English was a perfect example of that;
>>>>>>>>>> little
>>>>>>>>>> of my intended meaning was originally clear to German speakers I
>>>>>>>>>> reckon,
>>>>>>>>>> and translating back to American English renders it not much more
>>>>>>>>>> than
>>>>>>>>>> gibberish.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> What does gibberish translate to in German?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Gabby <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Heyo Chrissy, my eternal savior! I appreciate very much your
>>>>>>>>>>> attempt at saving whatever was never there. The ring is just a
>>>>>>>>>>> parable, but
>>>>>>>>>>> I will soon have gone full circle again.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> And hey, I'd rather you accused me of foul language than
>>>>>>>>>>> belittling my language competence! Your German English sounds just
>>>>>>>>>>> like
>>>>>>>>>>> your American English by the way.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I find it noticeable how you come to think that the long gone
>>>>>>>>>>> Francis might be of help while I perceive others, who are presently
>>>>>>>>>>> active
>>>>>>>>>>> in this interpretations club, who are doing a much better job.
>>>>>>>>>>> Anyways.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I joined this group because of the topic keywords and the
>>>>>>>>>>> writing "Minds Eye", which in my eyes allowed for singular as well
>>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>>> plural interpretations due to the "oral markers". The vast majority
>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>> active posters was Americans, which I got to know as loud,
>>>>>>>>>>> dominant,
>>>>>>>>>>> aggressive. And their strategically silent, submissive,
>>>>>>>>>>> passive-aggressive
>>>>>>>>>>> counterparts of course. My aim was to not get worked up anymore by
>>>>>>>>>>> what I
>>>>>>>>>>> perceive here, which I haven't fully managed to reach yet. But I
>>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>> learned so much already about the power of manipulation and
>>>>>>>>>>> distraction and
>>>>>>>>>>> emotional dependencies in what you'd think was banal online
>>>>>>>>>>> chatting ...
>>>>>>>>>>> amazing! I will still write up a little lessons learned micro
>>>>>>>>>>> article on
>>>>>>>>>>> the difference between the American and the German understanding of
>>>>>>>>>>> God and
>>>>>>>>>>> post it here.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In my opinion this place is not dead because Neil has adopted it
>>>>>>>>>>> as his personal writing playground, which no one objects to. That's
>>>>>>>>>>> fine
>>>>>>>>>>> with me and tells me I'm late with my project.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Greetings once more across the Atlantic!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Am Sonntag, 1. März 2015 01:56:27 UTC+1 schrieb Chris Jenkins:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Was passiert, wenn der einzige Weg, wie wir kommunizieren
>>>>>>>>>>>> konnte, war durch Fremdsoftware nicht in der Lage zu verstehen,
>>>>>>>>>>>> unsere
>>>>>>>>>>>> Emotionen? Die digitale Kommunikation nicht Ton jetzt vermitteln,
>>>>>>>>>>>> sich
>>>>>>>>>>>> vorstellen, wenn sie verloren auch Nuancen in der Übersetzung?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Ich denke an das, weil ich die Gespräche in dieser Gruppe
>>>>>>>>>>>> häufig brechen in zwei Menschen aneinander vorbei sprechen. Ich
>>>>>>>>>>>> frage mich,
>>>>>>>>>>>> wenn sie die anderen Lautsprecher verstehen überhaupt. Wenn unsere
>>>>>>>>>>>> Worte
>>>>>>>>>>>> verloren nicht nur ihr Ton, sondern auch ihre heimatlichen
>>>>>>>>>>>> Dialekt; wenn
>>>>>>>>>>>> sie etwas wurde noch der Sprecher nicht verstehen, bevor sie von
>>>>>>>>>>>> einer
>>>>>>>>>>>> anderen Person erhalten, würden wir in der Lage, überhaupt zu
>>>>>>>>>>>> kommunizieren?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Ich wünschte, Fran waren hier, um zu wiegen; er würde haben
>>>>>>>>>>>> Einblick Ich würde wertvoll wie ein englischer Muttersprachler,
>>>>>>>>>>>> die so viel
>>>>>>>>>>>> Zeit in einem Land mit einer anderen als seiner Muttersprache
>>>>>>>>>>>> verbracht
>>>>>>>>>>>> hat, zu finden. Gabby hat ähnliche Einsicht gegeben, wie viel Zeit
>>>>>>>>>>>> sie in
>>>>>>>>>>>> englischer Sprache bei uns verbringt, (und wie oft habe ich
>>>>>>>>>>>> gefragt, ob ich
>>>>>>>>>>>> einen Sinn in der Übersetzung verpasst), aber ich nehme an, sie
>>>>>>>>>>>> werden
>>>>>>>>>>>> meist nur Spaß meines schlecht übersetzt machen Deutsch. : D
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the
>>>>>>>>>>> Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from
>>>>>>>>>>> it, send an email to [email protected].
>>>>>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic
>>>>>>>>>> in the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/minds-eye/wo_ToDMnO4s/unsu
>>>>>>>>>> bscribe.
>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email
>>>>>>>>>> to [email protected].
>>>>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>>>>>> Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>>>>>>>>> send an email to [email protected].
>>>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>>>> Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>>>>>>> send an email to [email protected].
>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
>>>> Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/
>>>> topic/minds-eye/wo_ToDMnO4s/unsubscribe.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
>>>> [email protected].
>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>
>>> --
>>
>> ---
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
>> Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/minds-eye/wo_ToDMnO4s/unsubscribe.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
>> [email protected].
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
""Minds Eye"" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
""Minds Eye"" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
