PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 9:48 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of
synapses]
Edward W. Porter wrote:
Richard,
I am aware of the type-token distinction, and I think the distinction
between the class of Diet Coke cans
Edward W. Porter wrote:
Richard,
Let's just bury the hatchet. I am too busy right now to spend any more
time on this.
No hatchets need to be buried. This is not a contest.
It is a shame that you leave the discussion without making any response
to my detailed effort to clear up the
.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number
of synapses]
Edward W. Porter wrote:
Richard,
I will only respond to the below copied one of the questions in your
last message because of lack of time. I pick this example because it
was so “DEEP
On 10/20/07, Matt Mahoney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[most of post snipped and agreed with]
Without a number, you could argue that the vast majority of synapses store
subconscious (non recallable) memories. But I can still argue otherwise.
Humans are not significantly superior to other large
As I said above, it leaves many things unsaid and unclear. For example,
does it activate all or multiple nodes in a cluster together or not? Does
it always activate the most general cluster covering a given pattern, or
does it use some measure of how well a cluster fits input to select
Richard,
You might be interested to know how much attention one of your articles
has gotten in the mailto:agi@v2.listbox.com agi@v2.listbox.com mailing
list under the RE: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and
number of synapses thread, which has been dedicated to it.
Below
Edward W. Porter wrote:
Dear Readers of the RE: Bogus Neuroscience Thread,
Because I am the one responsible for bringing to the attention of this
list the Granger article (“Engines of the brain: The computational
instruction set of human cognition”, by Richard Granger) that has caused
the
, October 22, 2007 2:55 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of
synapses]
Edward W. Porter wrote:
Dear Readers of the RE: Bogus Neuroscience Thread,
Because I am the one responsible for bringing to the attention of this
list
On 10/23/07, J Storrs Hall, PhD [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Still don't buy it. What the article amounts to is that speed-reading is
fake. No kind of recognition beyond skimming (e.g. just ignoring a
substantial proportion of the text) is called for to explain the observed
performance.
And I'm
On Monday 22 October 2007 08:01:55 pm, Richard Loosemore wrote:
Did you ever try to parse a sentence with more than one noun in it?
Well, all right: but please be assured that the rest of us do in fact
do that.
Why make insulting personal remarkss instead of explaining your reasoning?
On Monday 22 October 2007 08:48:20 pm, Russell Wallace wrote:
On 10/23/07, J Storrs Hall, PhD [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Still don't buy it. What the article amounts to is that speed-reading is
fake. No kind of recognition beyond skimming (e.g. just ignoring a
substantial proportion of the
On Monday 22 October 2007 09:33:24 pm, Edward W. Porter wrote:
Richard,
...
Are you capable of understanding how that might be considered insulting?
I think in all seriousness that he literally cannot understand. Richard's
emotional interaction is very similar to that of some autistic people I
On 10/23/07, J Storrs Hall, PhD [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Still don't buy it. Saccades are normally well below the conscious level, and
a vast majority of what goes on cognitively is not available to
introspection. Any good reader gets to the point where the sentence meanings,
not the words at
You can DO them consciously but that doesn't necessarily mean that you can
intentionally become conscious of the ones you are doing unconsciously.
Try cutting a hole in a piece of paper and moving it smoothly across another
page that has text on it. When your eye tracks the smoothly moving
On 10/23/07, J Storrs Hall, PhD [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You can DO them consciously but that doesn't necessarily mean that you can
intentionally become conscious of the ones you are doing unconsciously.
One every few seconds happens involuntarily, when I try to not let any
through at all; but
Some semi-organized responses to points raised in this thread...
1) About spatial maps...
It seems to be the case that the brain uses spatial maps a lot, which
abstract
considerably from the territory they represent
Similarly in Novamente we have a spatial map data structure which has an
efficiencies of
mathematics we often don't stop to appreciate.
Ed Porter
-Original Message-
From: Benjamin Goertzel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2007 8:49 AM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses.. P.S.
Some semi-organized
On 10/21/07, Edward W. Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ben,
Good Post
I my mind the ability to map each of N things into a model of a space is a
very valuable thing. It lets us represent all of the N^2 spatial
relationships between those N things based on just N mappings. This is
http://www.mail-archive.com/agi@v2.listbox.com/msg08026.html
is where Ben Goertzel wrote stimuli evoking AGI list response.
Some semi-organized responses to points raised in this thread...
[...]
Furthermore, it seems to be the case that
the brain stores a lot of detail about some
things
Benjamin,
It's interesting that you mentioned this right now. My discussion with
Edward in parallel thread effectively led to this issue. Basically, it's
useful to be able to find regularities between arbitrary pair of concepts
(say, A and B) that system supports (as kind of domain-independence).
the notion that the
information in the human brain contained only 10^9 bits was bombastic
enough.
Ed Porter
-Original Message-
From: Vladimir Nesov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2007 11:34 AM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: [agi] Human memory and number
Edward,
Your reply raised very interesting issues which I'll have to think about
some more. I'll also need to read Valiant's paper to get a better idea of
realistic properties of the brain regarding this kind of process. So, I'll
answer in more detailed way when I'm ready.
For now, I have to
Edward W. Porter wrote:
[snip]
There is a very interest paper at
http://www.icsuci.edu/~granger/RHGenginesJ1s.pdf
http://www.ics.uci.edu/~granger/RHGenginesJ1s.pdf that I have referred
to before on this list that states the cortico-thalmic feedback loop
functions to serialize the brain's
Loosemore wrote:
Edward
If I were you, I would not get too excited about this paper, nor others
of this sort (see, e.g. Granger's other general brain-engineering paper
at http://www.dartmouth.edu/~rhg/pubs/RHGai50.pdf).
This kind of research comes pretty close to something that deserves
On 10/21/07, Edward W. Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Vladimir,
Yes, the deleted point FIVE mentioned that I had assumed (perhaps
incorrectly) that Valiant was looking for enough interconnect to do
traditinal Hebbian learning, which as normally defined would require
synapses from either A
Ben:Furthermore, it seems to be the case that the brain stores a lot of detail
about some
things that it sees -- and much less about others.
For instance, it's famous that when observing a visual scene, a person can
generally
remember only around 7 visual facts about it. Trained observers can
On 10/21/07, Edward W. Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Vladimir,
Yes, if a concept is defined by its associations, and if a significant
subset of them somewhat distinguish a concept, it would seem only natural
that links between associations of nodes A and node could help the two
is valuable in it.
If so, you may be denying yourself valuable insights.
Ed Porter
-Original Message-
From: Richard Loosemore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2007 2:12 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of
synapses
memory and number of synapses.. P.S.
On 10/21/07, Edward W. Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Vladimir,
Yes, if a concept is defined by its associations, and if a significant
subset of them somewhat distinguish a concept, it would seem only natural
that links between associations of nodes
Fax (617) 494-1822
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
*From:* Vladimir Nesov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*Sent:* Sunday, October 21, 2007 6:51 PM
*To:* agi@v2.listbox.com
*Subject:* Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses.. P.S.
On 10/21/07, Edward W. Porter [EMAIL
Benjamin Goertzel wrote:
Loosemore wrote:
Edward
If I were you, I would not get too excited about this paper, nor others
of this sort (see, e.g. Granger's other general brain-engineering paper
at http://www.dartmouth.edu/~rhg/pubs/RHGai50.pdf).
This kind of research
The questions you ask are not worth asking, because you cannot do
anything with a 'theory' (Granger's) that consists of a bunch of vague
assertions about various outdated, broken cognitive ideas, asserted
without justification.
Richard Loosemore
Richard, you haven't convinced me, but I
.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of
synapses]
Loosemore wrote:
Edward
If I were you, I would not get too excited about this paper, nor others
of this sort (see, e.g. Granger's other general brain-engineering paper
at http://www.dartmouth.edu
-Original Message-
From: Richard Loosemore [_mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2007 2:12 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of
synapses]
Edward W. Porter wrote:
[snip]
There is a very interest paper at
_http
Edward W. Porter wrote:
As Ben suggests, clearly Granger’s title claims to much. At best the
article suggests what may be some important aspects of the computational
architecture of the human brain, not anything approaching a complete
instruction set.
But as I implied in my last post to
On Oct 21, 2007, at 6:37 PM, Richard Loosemore wrote:
It took me at least five years of struggle to get to the point
where I could start to have the confidence to call a spade a spade
It still looks like a shovel to me.
Cheers,
J. Andrew Rogers
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI:
It took me at least five years of struggle to get to the point where I
could start to have the confidence to call a spade a spade, and dismiss
stuff that looked like rubbish.
Now, you say we have to forgive academics for doing this? The hell we
do.
If I see garbage being peddled as if
And you are also not above making patronizing remarks in which you
implicitly refer to someone as behaving in a simian -- i.e.
monkey-like manner.
Hey, I'm a monkey too -- and I'm pretty tired of being one. Let's bring on
the
Singularity already!!!
If you read the paper I just wrote,
.).
- Original Message -
From: Mike Tintner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2007 7:33 AM
Subject: Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses
Vlad et al,
Slightly O/T - while you guys are arguing about how much info the brain
stores and processes
On 10/20/07, Mark Waser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Images are *not* an efficient way to store data. Unless they are
three-dimensional images, they lack data. Normally, they include a lot of
unnecessary or redundant data. It is very, very rare that a computer stores
any but the smallest image
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2007 9:59 AM
Subject: Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses
MW: Take your own example of an outline map -- *none* of the
current high-end
mapping services (MapQuest, Google Maps, etc) store their maps as
images. They *all* store them symbolicly in a relational
FWIW:
A few years (decades?) ago some researchers took PET scans of people who
were imagining a rectangle rotating (in 3-space, as I remember). They
naturally didn't get much detail, but what they got was consistent with
people applying a rotation algorithm within the visual cortex. This
@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2007 6:49 PM
Subject: Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses.. P.S.
FWIW:
A few years (decades?) ago some researchers took PET scans of people who
were imagining a rectangle rotating (in 3-space, as I remember). They
naturally didn't get much
43 matches
Mail list logo
