Legg had perhaps that as his *only* purpose but, enroute, he accomplished
something very important for other purposes:
Provide a semantic taxonomy so he could, to use Nick Szabo's idiom "reduce
the argument surface".
Discourse about "Consciousness", like "Intelligence", is so riddled with
emotion
Ok you can by emailing agi@agi.topicbox.com .
I'm still leaving my tab open though. I'm not forgetting about you guys or this
place. Many older topics will be only accessible by website.
--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink:
https://a
Ok, email sucks. You can't start a new topic.
--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink:
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T767c63567e469cb2-Meb9906f9c89250b9dcc853b8
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
Every day we kill bugs. Because we can't see them, nor do they look like us.
And we can stomp on them. In fact they try to attack us. So here you have leg
kicking automatically and it's not gonna end pretty. But even when they look
like you, like say cows or pigs, they are put in slaughter farms
"3. The property of agents that makes it unethical to harm them."
The ONLY reason its 'unethical' to harm or kill 'ANYONE' when they have food
you want is because A) they look like you _a lot_ and 2) they'll *kick* your
head in. Mice fear lions, not bread crumbs. Rocks don't fight back. There's
On Wed, Nov 6, 2019, 8:24 PM James Bowery wrote:
Has anyone pulled a Shane Legg on "consciousness"?
>
> https://arxiv.org/abs/0706.3639
>
Here are a few possible definitions of consciousness.
1. The mental state of wakefulness. The opposite of unconscious.
2. Qualia. What thinking feels like.
3.
The word 'conscious' isn't even in that Paper LOL little own 'ness'. But rest
assured it's just the same thing. I'll explain later what intelligence is
clearer.
--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink:
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T25
Good idea James. A lot of research going on with AGI and consciousness. Matt
may want to Google around a bit to get updated.
I do wonder Matt, if something is "perceptually lossless" why would you call
that marketing? You can't really call it lossy can you?
--
Has anyone pulled a Shane Legg on "consciousness"?
https://arxiv.org/abs/0706.3639
On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 6:06 PM Matt Mahoney wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 6, 2019, 4:53 AM John Rose wrote:
>
>> Question: Why don't the compression experts call near-lossless and
>> perceptual-lossless lossy?
>> Ans
Agreed!
--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink:
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T252d8aea50d6d8f9-M4123820d5bfc507575e34aa6
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
On Wed, Nov 6, 2019, 4:53 AM John Rose wrote:
> Question: Why don't the compression experts call near-lossless and
> perceptual-lossless lossy?
> Answer: Because you don't know. They could be either though admittedly
> high probability lossy.
>
No. It's marketing.
How do you know something is c
SAUCIE:
https://www.krishnaswamylab.org/projects/saucie
--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink:
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T2c020b6c99734dc1-Mbdf1d28d921a46d3736fe105
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscript
Ah see!:
"
Mail is a very different medium than chatrooms.
-> mail should be long format, 2-3 paragraphs minimum.
-> mail must not rely on it's ordering in sequence, different ppl sort
their inboxes differently and messages may be radically out of order.
"
WHY SO!? Cus EMAIL can't handle it!? I'
It would be great if all our browser tabs and conversations in them were all in
email...but it's too crammy. I can't imagine going through my email page by
page looking for older topics if I want to reply to one recent one. Maybe I
should give it a try.
--
Although this is a mailing list I always use it as a website / forum, as I can
search through ALL topics and recent ones, and replies, easily. I mean, if you
don't access our conversations through website, you shouldn't be here at all. -
You can't be productive by using email to reply. Email onl
Alan I agree, the chat nature for some of these people is absurd for a
mailing list. Not to mention the gibberish and seemingly off-topic
diatribes, retractions and dubious claims. It's never this bad on reddit
or the linkedin and facebook groups related to AGI.
I see the mentifex guy is still a
Question: Why don't the compression experts call near-lossless and
perceptual-lossless lossy?
Answer: Because you don't know. They could be either though admittedly high
probability lossy.
How do you know something is conscious? It could be perceptually conscious but
not really conscious.
So l
17 matches
Mail list logo
