> -Original Message-
> From: Matt Mahoney via AGI
>
>
> It's relevant if consciousness is the secret sauce. and if it applies to the
> complexity problem.
>
> Jim is right. I don't believe in magic.
>
A Recipe for a Theory Mind
Three pints of AIT (Algorithmic Information Theory) Ale
from those
principles of success. We still have to remain pragmatic and keep it relevant
to mankind. Else, it would not be AGI in any case.
From: John Rose
Sent: Friday, 14 September 2018 6:20 PM
To: 'AGI'
Subject: RE: [agi] E=mc^2 Morphism Musings
If you want to talk about user experience then do so (as you just
did.) Do not conflate human experience with programming constructs and
then find a tangential argument to justify it.
Jim Bromer
On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 12:21 PM John Rose wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Jim Bromer
> -Original Message-
> From: Jim Bromer via AGI
>
>
> There are some complications of the experience of our existence, and those
> complications may be explained by the complex processes of mind.
> Since we can think we can think about the experience of life and interweave
> the strands
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/02/science/plants-consciousness-anesthesia.html?module=Promotron=Body=click=article
Jim Bromer
On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 8:01 PM Jim Bromer wrote:
>
> Conscious experience - the soul or whatever it is - is not relevant to
> contemporary computer science. I do not
Conscious experience - the soul or whatever it is - is not relevant to
contemporary computer science. I do not agree with the dismissal of
that feeling of experience either. As I told Marvin Minsky I do agree
that whatever conscious experience is it probably has the potential to
be explained by
On Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 4:15 PM wrote:
> On Thursday, September 13, 2018, at 3:10 PM, Jim Bromer wrote:
>
> I don't even think that stuff is relevant.
>
>
> Jim,
>
> It's relevant if consciousness is the secret sauce. and if it applies to
> the complexity problem.
>
Jim is right. I don't believe
On Thursday, September 13, 2018, at 3:10 PM, Jim Bromer wrote:
> I don't even think that stuff is relevant.
Jim,
It's relevant if consciousness is the secret sauce. and if it applies to the
complexity problem.
Would a non-conscious entity have a reason to develop AGI?
John
12 September 2018 10:27 PM
> *To:* AGI
> *Subject:* Re: [agi] E=mc^2 Morphism Musings... (Intelligence=math*cJohn
> et alonsciousness^2 ?)
>
> "Can you see the consciousness at work? Can you sense and immerse in
> it? Can you hear the myriad of messages clipping
Sent: Wednesday, 12 September 2018 10:27 PM
To: AGI
Subject: Re: [agi] E=mc^2 Morphism Musings... (Intelligence=math*cJohn et
alonsciousness^2 ?)
"Can you see the consciousness at work? Can you sense and immerse in
it? Can you hear the myriad of messages clipping by? If so, you'll
re
"Can you see the consciousness at work? Can you sense and immerse in
it? Can you hear the myriad of messages clipping by? If so, you'll
realize it is pervasive, endless, and not locality driven, not
discrete. Like the waves of the ocean, the outcome of a whole universe
conspiring to tell its
> -Original Message-
> From: Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via AGI
>
> Challenging a la Haramein? No doubt. But that is what the adventure is all
> about. Have we managed to wrap our minds fully round the implications of
> Mandelbrot's contribution? And then, there is so much else of
hy such a feat would
not be possible.
Rob
From: John Rose
Sent: Tuesday, 11 September 2018 3:41 PM
To: agi@agi.topicbox.com
Subject: RE: [agi] E=mc^2 Morphism Musings... (Intelligence=math*cJohn et
alonsciousness^2 ?)
> -Original Message-
> From: Nanogr
John et al
Is there a truth in all of this? If you cannot see it, then you cannot see it.
Einstein could see it, how the universe operated, except for what happened
beyond the speed of light.
Can you see the consciousness at work? Can you sense and immerse in it? Can you
hear the myriad of
14 matches
Mail list logo
