Josh,
Your point about layering makes perfect sense.
I just ordered your book, but, impatient as I am, could I ask a question
about this, though I've asked a similar question before: Why have not the
elite of intelligent and open-minded leading AI researchers not attempted a
multi-layered
I'll try to answer this and Mike Tintner's question at the same time. The
typical GOFAI engine over the past decades has had a layer structure
something like this:
Problem-specific assertions
Inference engine/database
Lisp
on top of the machine and OS. Now it turns out that this is plenty to
On 6/6/07, Peter Voss [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
'fraid not. Have to look after our investors' interests… (and, like Ben, I'm
not keen for AGI technology to be generally available)
But at least Novamente makes a convinceable amount of their ideas
available IMHO.
P.S. Probabilistic Logic
Interesting points, but I believe you can get around alot of the problems with
two additional factors,
a. using either large quantities of quality text, (ie novels, newspapers) or
similar texts like newspapers.
b. using a interactive built in 'checker' system, assisted learning where the
AI
Two different responses to this type of arguement.
Once you simulate something to the fact that we cant tell the difference
between it in any way, then it IS that something for most all intents and
purposes as far as the tests you have go.
If it walks like a human, talks like a human, then for
On 6/11/07, James Ratcliff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Interesting points, but I believe you can get around alot of the problems
with two additional factors,
a. using either large quantities of quality text, (ie novels, newspapers) or
similar texts like newspapers.
b. using a interactive built in
Has anyone tried a test of something as simple as per line of code / function?
Meaning that each function or module could have a % value associated with
it (set by many users average rating)
And then simply giving credit by line of code input.
Anyone writing cruddy long code would initially
Correct, but I don't believe that systems (like Cyc) are doing this type of
Active learning now, and it would help to gather quality information and
fact-check it.
Cyc does have some interesting projects where it takes a proposed statment and
when a engineer is working with it, will go out
Has anyone tried a test of something as simple as per line of code /
function?
My first official programming course was a Master's level course at an
Ivy League college. The course project was a full-up LISP interpreter. My
program was ~800-900 lines and passed all testing with flying
On Monday 11 June 2007 12:12:26 pm Mark Waser wrote:
... The last thing that I want to do is *anything* that encourages people
to write more code ...
The classic apocryphal story is of the shop where they had this fellow who was
an unbelievably productive programmer -- up until the day he
Monday, June 11, 2007, Mark Waser wrote:
MW The only scheme that I'd possibly accept based on lines of code
MW would be one where if someone else wrote a tighter program, the original
MW writer would get negative credit (i.e. something like
MW if they wrote 7,000 lines and I re-did it with
Josh,
Thanks for that answer on the layering of mind.
It's not that any existing level is wrong, but there aren't enough of
them, so
that the higher ones aren't being built on the right primitives in current
systems. Word-level concepts in the mind are much more elastic and plastic
than
James,
Frank Jackson (in Epiphenomenal Qualia) defined qualia as
...certain features of the bodily sensations especially, but also of
certain perceptual experiences, which no amount of purely physical
information includes.. :-)
If it walks like a human, talks like a human, then for all those
On 6/11/07, Mark Waser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm sorry about the confusion. Let me correct by saying: it *is* to
your advantage to exaggerate your contributions, but your peers won't allow
it.
Cool.
I'll then move back to my other point that is probably better phrased as
I don't
On Monday 11 June 2007 02:06:35 pm Joshua Fox wrote:
...
Could I ask also that you take a stab at a psychological/sociological
question: Why have not the leading minds of AI (considering for this
purpose only the true creative thinkers with status in the community,
however small a fraction
Below is a program that can feel pain. It is a simulation of a programmable
2-input logic gate that you train using reinforcement conditioning.
/* pain.cpp
This program simulates a programmable 2-input logic gate.
You train it by reinforcement conditioning. You provide a pair of
input bits
Matt Mahoney writes: Below is a program that can feel pain. It is a simulation
of a programmable 2-input logic gate that you train using reinforcement
conditioning.
Is it ethical to compile and run this program?
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe
--- James Ratcliff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Interesting points, but I believe you can get around alot of the problems
with two additional factors,
a. using either large quantities of quality text, (ie novels, newspapers) or
similar texts like newspapers.
b. using a interactive built in
Here is a program that feels pain. It is a simulation of a 2-input logic gate
that you train by reinforcement learning. It feels in the sense that it
adjusts its behavior to avoid negative reinforcement from the user.
/* pain.cpp - A program that can feel pleasure and pain.
The program
On Monday 11 June 2007 03:22:04 pm Matt Mahoney wrote:
/* pain.cpp - A program that can feel pleasure and pain.
...
Ouch! :-)
Josh
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
An additional idea: each member's vote could be weighted by the
member's total amount of contributions. This way, we can establish a
network of genuine contributors via self-organization, and protect against
mischief-makers, nonsense, or sabotage, etc.
YKY
-
This list is sponsored by
--- Derek Zahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Matt Mahoney writes: Below is a program that can feel pain. It is a
simulation of a programmable 2-input logic gate that you train using
reinforcement conditioning.
Is it ethical to compile and run this program?
Well, that is a good question. Ethics
And here's the human psuedocode:
1. Hold Knife above flame until red.
2. Place knife on arm.
3. a. Accept Pain sensation
b. Scream or respond as necessary
4. Press knife harder into skin.
5. Goto 3, until 6.
6. Pass out from pain
Matt Mahoney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Below is a program
Keep going ... won't be too long until you invent fungible tokens for your
people that act as a medium of exchange, a store of value, and a unit of
account.
On Monday 11 June 2007 07:22:46 pm YKY (Yan King Yin) wrote:
An additional idea: each member's vote could be weighted by the
member's
24 matches
Mail list logo
