Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.prolog > #13660 > unrolled thread

Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.prolog

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-06-04 07:49 -0700
    Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-06-20 08:20 -0700
      Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-06-21 03:24 -0700
      Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-06-23 02:14 -0700
        Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-06-24 15:25 -0700
          Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-29 17:58 -0700
            Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 06:48 -0700
              Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 06:54 -0700
                Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 07:31 -0700
                  Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-08-02 02:02 -0700
                    Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-08-02 02:14 -0700
                      Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-08-02 02:20 -0700
                        Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 07:34 -0700
        Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-11-20 05:23 -0800
          Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-11-20 09:01 -0800
            Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-11-25 07:23 -0800
              Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-11-25 13:10 -0800
                Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-11-27 09:31 -0800
                  Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-11-28 21:47 -0800
                    Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-11-28 21:58 -0800
                      Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-11-28 23:33 -0800
                        Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-11-30 15:43 -0800
        Zero Tokens comming out of me (Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-10-30 16:47 +0100
      FYI: New Journal NAI (Was: The road to Artificial Intelligence) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-11-06 17:18 +0100
        The Bee Clock Model (Re: FYI: New Journal NAI) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-11-06 17:41 +0100
      ChatGPT for the Flintstones: Bloomberg (Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-11-11 22:34 +0100
        Silicon Valley is the new Detroit (Re: ChatGPT for the Flintstones: Bloomberg) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-02-18 18:13 +0100
          Re: Silicon Valley is the new Detroit (Re: ChatGPT for the Flintstones: Bloomberg) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-02-18 18:14 +0100
    Minimal Logics in the 2020's: A Meteoric Rise (Was: The road to Artificial Intelligence) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-07-04 23:09 +0200
      The curse of Negri & Plato (Was: Minimal Logics in the 2020's: A Meteoric Rise) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-07-05 03:52 +0200
        Re: The curse of Negri & Plato (Was: Minimal Logics in the 2020's: A Meteoric Rise) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-07-05 03:54 +0200
          Euklid: Am I a joke to you? (Re: The curse of Negri & Plato) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-07-13 08:21 +0200
      Re: Minimal Logics in the 2020's: A Meteoric Rise (Was: The road to Artificial Intelligence) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-07-05 06:38 +0200
        Re: Minimal Logics in the 2020's: A Meteoric Rise (Was: The road to Artificial Intelligence) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-07-07 23:13 +0200
          Re: Minimal Logics in the 2020's: A Meteoric Rise (Was: The road to Artificial Intelligence) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-07-07 23:17 +0200
      French Philosophy in 2024 (Was: Minimal Logics in the 2020's: A Meteoric Rise) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-07-12 11:27 +0200
        Re: French Philosophy in 2024 (Was: Minimal Logics in the 2020's: A Meteoric Rise) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-07-12 11:37 +0200
          Corona isn't over 2024 (Was: French Philosophy in 2024) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-07-12 12:20 +0200
          Re: Corona isn't over 2024 (Was: French Philosophy in 2024) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-07-12 12:36 +0200
      The error in Jan von Platos presentation (Re: Minimal Logics in the 2020's: A Meteoric Rise) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-07-13 10:33 +0200
        Re: The error in Jan von Platos presentation (Re: Minimal Logics in the 2020's: A Meteoric Rise) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-07-13 10:58 +0200
          Re: The error in Jan von Platos presentation (Re: Minimal Logics in the 2020's: A Meteoric Rise) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-07-14 00:05 +0200
            Re: The error in Jan von Platos presentation (Re: Minimal Logics in the 2020's: A Meteoric Rise) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-07-14 00:14 +0200
      Distinction between Computation & Derivation (Was: Minimal Logics in the 2020's: A Meteoric Rise) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-07-22 12:55 +0200
      Prolegomena by Rappaport (Re: Minimal Logics in the 2020's: A Meteoric Rise (Was: The road to Artificial Intelligence)) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-07-31 22:15 +0200
        2nd Cognitive Turn ~~> no Bayesian Brain (Re: Prolegomena by Rappaport) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-08-03 22:50 +0200
          Ok I made a joke, sorry (e: 2nd Cognitive Turn ~~> no Bayesian Brain) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-08-03 23:29 +0200
            Re: Ok I made a joke, sorry (e: 2nd Cognitive Turn ~~> no Bayesian Brain) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-08-03 23:55 +0200
              bullshit bullshit bullshit (Re: Ok I made a joke, sorry) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-08-04 00:14 +0200
      The two rules (Was: Minimal Logics in the 2020's: A Meteoric Rise) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-08-04 00:57 +0200
      "Emotional AI" and "Spiritual AI" (Re: Minimal Logics in the 2020's: A Meteoric Rise) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-10-03 12:28 +0200
        Oh shit, too late! (Re: "Emotional AI" and "Spiritual AI" (Re: Minimal Logics in the 2020's: A Meteoric Rise)) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-10-03 12:40 +0200
    LLM and Prolog, a Marriage in Heaven? (Was: The road to Artificial Intelligence) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-08-04 22:10 +0200
      The anchoring problem in a real world philosopher (Was: LLM and Prolog, a Marriage in Heaven?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-08-08 16:56 +0200
        Long life learning also for real world philosophers? (Re: The anchoring problem in a real world philosopher) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-08-08 17:18 +0200
    Prolog for the pre frontal context (PFC) (Was: The road to Artificial Intelligence) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-08-28 17:28 +0200
    Re: Prolog for the pre frontal cortex (PFC) (Was: The road to Artificial Intelligence) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-08-28 17:31 +0200
    No time for the hairdresser betweeen 09.06.2023 and 11.07.2024 (Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-09-01 16:43 +0200
    Holy Shit: AI is cheaper than Humans (Was: The road to Artificial Intelligence) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-09-01 22:38 +0200
      AI robots from Disney (Was: Holy Shit: AI is cheaper than Humans) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-09-01 23:17 +0200
        I can't stand Mira Murati's Eyewash (Was: AI robots from Disney (Was: Holy Shit: AI is cheaper than Humans)) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-09-03 12:01 +0200
          After blue, green why not start yellow (Re: I can't stand Mira Murati's Eyewash) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-09-03 17:56 +0200
            miramurati bye bye (Re: After blue, green why not start yellow) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-09-25 22:09 +0200
              Im memoriam Doug Lenant (1950 - 2023) (Re: miramurati bye bye) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-12-01 00:56 +0100
                2026 the Year Prolog **plonked** Itself [Strawberry Prolog is back] (Was: Im memoriam Doug Lenant (1950 - 2023)) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-02-04 02:20 +0100
                  Spies and Playboys: Don't use insecure E-mail [https://www.jmail.world/ Example] Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-02-04 11:19 +0100
                  Some ANTHEM Cringe Nonsense [More Dead Horses] (Was: 2026 the Year Prolog **plonked** Itself [Strawberry Prolog is back]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-02-05 09:53 +0100
                    Gecode: Guns N' Roses - Dead Horse (Was: Some ANTHEM Cringe Nonsense [More Dead Horses]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-02-05 10:21 +0100
                  2026 the Year golang lost its Marbles (Was: 2026 the Year Prolog **plonked** Itself [Strawberry Prolog is back]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-02-14 09:53 +0100
                    Mark V. Shaney caused Julio Di Egidio Suicide (Re: 2026 the Year golang lost its Marble) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-02-14 12:51 +0100
                      Is Causal AI simply ReLU (Geoffrey E. Hinton 2010) (Re: Mark V. Shaney caused Julio Di Egidio Suicide) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-02-17 11:37 +0100
                        Gen Alpha will grow up with Causal AI (Was: Is Causal AI simply ReLU (Geoffrey E. Hinton 2010)) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-02-19 20:00 +0100
                        LRM moving from FOM to TCS [Lean Prover] (Was: Is Causal AI simply ReLU (Geoffrey E. Hinton 2010))) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-02-27 10:20 +0100
                          Original Subject established by Chinese Scientists [Extenics] (Re: LRM moving from FOM to TCS [Lean Prover]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-02-28 16:36 +0100
                          DeepSeekMath: From psychophysischer Parallelismus to GPRO (Re: Odysseus PTSD: Does Function need Consistency?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-03-06 02:29 +0100
              "superhumaness" excels "stackoverflow reputation" (Was: Im memoriam Doug Lenant (1950 - 2023) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-12-01 01:08 +0100
                para-governemental institution of violence (Re: "superhumaness" excels "stackoverflow reputation") Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-12-01 11:42 +0100
                Not only $TSLA is on fire sale! [The Decline of Prolog] (Was: "superhumaness" excels "stackoverflow reputation") Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-03-14 13:37 +0100
                  Re: Not only $TSLA is on fire sale! [The Decline of Prolog] (Was: "superhumaness" excels "stackoverflow reputation") Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-03-14 14:06 +0100
                  Splitting up the Prologue to Prolog Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-05-19 10:54 +0200
      Safe Superintelligence (SSI): Now they are dancing Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-09-05 19:51 +0200
        Re: Safe Superintelligence (SSI): Now they are dancing Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-09-05 23:51 +0200
          Salem Aleikum: Maxwella's Equations Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-09-09 13:15 +0200
            non judicium, sed latrocinium (Re: Salem Aleikum: Maxwella's Equations) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-09-10 08:58 +0200
          Internet was made for cats (Re: Safe Superintelligence (SSI): Now they are dancing) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-09-13 12:58 +0200
            I was there, 3000 years ago (Re: Internet was made for cats) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-09-13 13:01 +0200
              Even Haitians are now voting for Trump (Re: I was there, 3000 years ago (Re: Internet was made for cats)) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-09-13 13:04 +0200
            supply chain attack (Was: Internet was made for cats( Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-09-17 22:18 +0200
              Polyfill Supply Chain Attack (Was: supply chain attack) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-10-11 09:12 +0200
      USA is shitting its pants (Was: Holy Shit: AI is cheaper than Humans) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-09-16 00:20 +0200
        scryer prolog is dead, BILAI instead? (Was: USA is shitting its pants) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-09-18 15:45 +0200
          Microsoft is plagiarizing my Invention [LLMs under the hood] Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-10-08 16:00 +0200
            Geoffrey Hinton / Nobelpreis für Physik [Re: Microsoft is plagiarizing my Invention [LLMs under the hood]] Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-10-08 16:03 +0200
          thank you for the FLOPs (Was: scryer prolog is dead, BILAI instead?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-12-01 14:34 +0100
            Is old school mode directed compilation dead? (Was: thank you for the FLOPs) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-01-24 17:57 +0100
              Re: Is old school mode directed compilation dead? (Was: thank you for the FLOPs) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-01-24 17:58 +0100
                format/2 doesn't agree with Trealla or SWI (Was: Is old school mode directed compilation dead?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-01-25 14:13 +0100
                DCG Translation with Unification Spillling (Was: Is old school mode directed compilation dead?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-01-25 20:44 +0100
                  Re: DCG Translation with Unification Spillling (Was: Is old school mode directed compilation dead?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-01-25 20:44 +0100
            Will WASM be fast some time? (Was: thank you for the FLOPs) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-03-04 10:09 +0100
              Re: Will WASM be fast some time? (Was: thank you for the FLOPs) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-03-04 10:13 +0100
        Book Project: WomanLogic (Re: USA is shitting its pants) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-11-14 22:25 +0100
          Re: Book Project: WomanLogic (Re: USA is shitting its pants) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-11-14 22:26 +0100
    Happy Birthday 75 Years of Artificial Intelligence Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-10-23 01:18 +0200
      Does ChatGPT know the difference between "k" and "kkkkkkkkkk"? Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-10-23 01:18 +0200
      What is it like to be a Bat? Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-10-23 22:35 +0200
        How Monkeys see the World (Re: What is it like to be a Bat?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-10-23 22:45 +0200
      Low-Code Penetration Prediction (Re: Happy Birthday 75 Years of Artificial Intelligence) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-10-30 23:09 +0100

Page 2 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6  Next page →

#13881

How do you show Segmentation faults in a bar chart diagram?

Here is a test with Trealla Prolog, same limit test, it completes the job.
Doesn’t clog up the memory indefinitely, works just as expected:

$ ./tpl -v
Trealla Prolog (c) Infradig 2020-2023, v2.30.48-21-g8dfd
$ ./tpl
?- ['../ciao/program2.p'].
   true.
?- between(1,100,_), suite_quiet, fail; true.
   true.
?-

You have to wait some while, but you can use the command ps -aux to
see that it doesn’t eat up memory. And I did the above test with the same

very large ulimit -m | -v which wasn’t hit by a segmentation fault.

Mild Shock schrieb am Mittwoch, 29. November 2023 um 06:58:28 UTC+1:
> With limits I get this result: 
> 
> $ target/release/scryer-prolog -v
> v0.9.3-57-ge8d8b09e
> $ ulimit -m 2000000 
> $ ulimit -v 2000000 
> $ target/release/scryer-prolog 
> ?- ['program2.p']. 
> true.
> ?- between(1,100,_), suite_quiet, fail; true.
> Segmentation fault 
> 
> Not ok! Should continue running till the end.
> Mild Shock schrieb am Mittwoch, 29. November 2023 um 06:47:15 UTC+1: 
> > Testing scryer-prolog doesn’t make any sense. Its not a 
> > Prolog system. It has memory leaks somewhere. 
> > Just try my SAT solver test suite: 
> > 
> > ?- between(1,100,_), suite_quiet, fail; true. 
> > 
> > VSZ and RSS memory is going up and up, with no end. 
> > Clogging my machine. I don’t think that this should happen, 
> > that a failure driven loop eats all memory? 
> > 
> > Thats just a fraud. How do you set some limits? 
> > Mild Shock schrieb am Montag, 27. November 2023 um 18:31:25 UTC+1: 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13904

A new player has entered the chat (Amazon Q):

#NLProc researcher @ AWS AI (@AmazonScience). Part-time 
machine learner & linguistics enthusiast. Previously: PhD 
@stanfordnlp, JD AI. He/him. Opinions my own.

It is really humbling to be part of the team that 
launched Amazon Q, a flagship #AWS product that 
helps users interact with their knowledge corpus using LLMs.

It's quite special to me personally, since it's only been 
3 years since I finished my PhD thesis on this exact topic.
https://twitter.com/qi2peng2

What does Gartner say about Business-Chatbots?

Opening Keynote: The Next Era − We Shape AI
AI Shapes Us l Gartner IT Symposium/Xpo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0s7Jw9xkSYQ

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14247 — Zero Tokens comming out of me (Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence)

Hi,

I have a "silent AI burnout". Means I am
currently doing some other stuff. This very
much unlike modern AI, which is measured

by tokens throughput:

Models: Quality, Performance & Price Analysis
https://artificialanalysis.ai/models

I guess my natural intelligence is currently ranking
in the left bottom corner, at least what comes
along social media.

Felix der Glücklich ! Don't forget to massage
your neurons with good old 90's house music:

It Will Make Me Crazy (Red Jelly Mix)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnwoUA7UGw8

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Not only the speed doesn't double every year anymore,
> also the density of transistors doesn't double
> every year anymore. See also:
> 
> ‘Moore’s Law’s dead,’ Nvidia CEO
> https://www.marketwatch.com/story/moores-laws-dead-nvidia-ceo-jensen-says-in-justifying-gaming-card-price-hike-11663798618
> 
> So there is some hope in FPGAs. The article writes:
> 
> "In the latter paper, which includes a great overview of
> the state of the art, Pilch and colleagues summarize
> this as shifting the processing from time to space —
> from using slow sequential CPU processing to hardware
> complexity, using the FPGA’s configurable fabric
> and inherent parallelism."
> 
> In reference to (no pay wall):
> 
> An FPGA-based real quantum computer emulator
> 15 December 2018 - Pilch et al.
> https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10825-018-1287-5
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb am Dienstag, 20. Juni 2023 um 17:20:27 UTC+2:
>> To hell with GPUs. Here come the FPGA qubits:
>>
>> Iran’s Military Quantum Claim: It’s Only 99.4% Ridiculous
>> https://hackaday.com/2023/06/15/irans-quantum-computing-on-fpga-claim-its-kinda-a-thing/
>>
>> The superposition property enables a quantum computer
>> to be in multiple states at once.
>> https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/definition/qubit
>>
>> Maybe their new board is even less suited for hitting
>> a ship with a torpedo than some machine learning?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14264 — FYI: New Journal NAI (Was: The road to Artificial Intelligence)

Hi,

Next issue 2:1 scheduled for January 2025
https://www.iospress.com/catalog/journals/neurosymbolic-artificial-intelligence

What is Neuro-Symbolic AI?
https://allegrograph.com/what-is-neuro-symbolic-ai/

Connectionists methods combined with symbolic
methods? BTW: Not something new really, but
nevertheless, the current times might ask for
more interdisciplinary work.

The article by Ron Sun, Dual-process theories,
cognitive architectures, and hybrid neural-
symbolic models, even admits it:

"This idea immediately harkens back to the 1990s
when hybrid models first emerged [..] Besides
being termed neural-symbolic or neurosymbolic models,
they have also been variously known as connectionist
symbolic model, hybrid symbolic neural networks,
or simply hybrid models or systems.

I argued back then and am still arguing today [..]
. In particular, within the human mental architecture,
we need to take into account dual processes (e.g.,
as has been variously termed as implicit versus explicit,
unconscious versus conscious, intuition versus reason,
System 1 versus System 2, and so on, albeit sometimes
with somewhat different connotations). Incidentally,
dual-process (or two-system) theories have become quite
popular lately."

Ok I will take a nap, and let my automatic
processing do the disgesting of what he wrote.

LoL

Mild Shock schrieb:
> To hell with GPUs. Here come the FPGA qubits:
> 
> Iran’s Military Quantum Claim: It’s Only 99.4% Ridiculous
> https://hackaday.com/2023/06/15/irans-quantum-computing-on-fpga-claim-its-kinda-a-thing/
> 
> The superposition property enables a quantum computer
> to be in multiple states at once.
> https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/definition/qubit
> 
> Maybe their new board is even less suited for hitting
> a ship with a torpedo than some machine learning?
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14265 — The Bee Clock Model (Re: FYI: New Journal NAI)

Hi,

But just proclaiming we do dual processing
possibly leads to nowhere. We need a
Bee Clock Model of the brain.

Why do we have REM (Rapid Eye Movement)
phases when we sleep. We should have
a cognitive architecture, which has a model

of how the brain operates:

1) The hour we wake up
2) The hour we eat brakefast
3) The hour we brush our teeth
4) The hour we commute to work
5) The hour we do paper work
6) The hour we take a break at work
7) The hour we do phone work
8) The hour we have lunch at work
Etc..

A lot is going on in each hour. Different
cognitive functions are performed invidually
and socially. An artificial intelligence prossibly

needs a same routine somehow.

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> Next issue 2:1 scheduled for January 2025
> https://www.iospress.com/catalog/journals/neurosymbolic-artificial-intelligence 
> 
> 
> What is Neuro-Symbolic AI?
> https://allegrograph.com/what-is-neuro-symbolic-ai/
> 
> Connectionists methods combined with symbolic
> methods? BTW: Not something new really, but
> nevertheless, the current times might ask for
> more interdisciplinary work.
> 
> The article by Ron Sun, Dual-process theories,
> cognitive architectures, and hybrid neural-
> symbolic models, even admits it:
> 
> "This idea immediately harkens back to the 1990s
> when hybrid models first emerged [..] Besides
> being termed neural-symbolic or neurosymbolic models,
> they have also been variously known as connectionist
> symbolic model, hybrid symbolic neural networks,
> or simply hybrid models or systems.
> 
> I argued back then and am still arguing today [..]
> . In particular, within the human mental architecture,
> we need to take into account dual processes (e.g.,
> as has been variously termed as implicit versus explicit,
> unconscious versus conscious, intuition versus reason,
> System 1 versus System 2, and so on, albeit sometimes
> with somewhat different connotations). Incidentally,
> dual-process (or two-system) theories have become quite
> popular lately."
> 
> Ok I will take a nap, and let my automatic
> processing do the disgesting of what he wrote.
> 
> LoL
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>> To hell with GPUs. Here come the FPGA qubits:
>>
>> Iran’s Military Quantum Claim: It’s Only 99.4% Ridiculous
>> https://hackaday.com/2023/06/15/irans-quantum-computing-on-fpga-claim-its-kinda-a-thing/ 
>>
>>
>> The superposition property enables a quantum computer
>> to be in multiple states at once.
>> https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/definition/qubit
>>
>> Maybe their new board is even less suited for hitting
>> a ship with a torpedo than some machine learning?
>>
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14280 — ChatGPT for the Flintstones: Bloomberg (Re: The road to Artificial Intelligence)

Hi,

Woa! ChatGPT for the Flintstones: Bloomberg

Our long-term investment in AI is already
available for fixed income securities.
Try it for yourself!
https://twitter.com/TheTerminal/status/1783473601632465352

Did she just say Terminal? LoL

Bye

P.S.: But the display of the extracted logical
query from the natural language phrase is quite
cute. Can ChatGPT do the same?

Mild Shock schrieb:
> To hell with GPUs. Here come the FPGA qubits:
> 
> Iran’s Military Quantum Claim: It’s Only 99.4% Ridiculous
> https://hackaday.com/2023/06/15/irans-quantum-computing-on-fpga-claim-its-kinda-a-thing/
> 
> The superposition property enables a quantum computer
> to be in multiple states at once.
> https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/definition/qubit
> 
> Maybe their new board is even less suited for hitting
> a ship with a torpedo than some machine learning?
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14448 — Silicon Valley is the new Detroit (Re: ChatGPT for the Flintstones: Bloomberg)

Hi,

How it started:

Lets use Silicon instead of Germanium
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Shockley

How its going, Intel producing buggy chips and missing the AI train:

Stock Collapse & Fire Sale:
https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/INTEL-CORPORATION-4829/news/Intel-Shares-Gain-After-Report-on-Potential-Break-Up-49088812/

Will Elon Musk also buy a piece of the cake?

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Woa! ChatGPT for the Flintstones: Bloomberg
> 
> Our long-term investment in AI is already
> available for fixed income securities.
> Try it for yourself!
> https://twitter.com/TheTerminal/status/1783473601632465352
> 
> Did she just say Terminal? LoL
> 
> Bye
> 
> P.S.: But the display of the extracted logical
> query from the natural language phrase is quite
> cute. Can ChatGPT do the same?
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>> To hell with GPUs. Here come the FPGA qubits:
>>
>> Iran’s Military Quantum Claim: It’s Only 99.4% Ridiculous
>> https://hackaday.com/2023/06/15/irans-quantum-computing-on-fpga-claim-its-kinda-a-thing/ 
>>
>>
>> The superposition property enables a quantum computer
>> to be in multiple states at once.
>> https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/definition/qubit
>>
>> Maybe their new board is even less suited for hitting
>> a ship with a torpedo than some machine learning?
>>
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14449 — Re: Silicon Valley is the new Detroit (Re: ChatGPT for the Flintstones: Bloomberg)

Hi,

Or just buy the dip, since they have something
in the pipeline? This is quite unclear:

Can Intel survive the valley of death?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZrPOjnAyqs

ChatGPT leaves my with a question mark: Yes, Sapphire
Rapids (Intel's 4th Gen Xeon) was too weak for what
it was supposed to compete against.

Too slow & inefficient for AI workloads → Nvidia/AMD
took over. Overall: A stopgap product while Intel
tries to recover with Granite Rapids (2024) and

Sierra Forest (2024/2025). Would you say Intel is too
far behind, or do you think they can still catch up?

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> How it started:
> 
> Lets use Silicon instead of Germanium
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Shockley
> 
> How its going, Intel producing buggy chips and missing the AI train:
> 
> Stock Collapse & Fire Sale:
> https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/INTEL-CORPORATION-4829/news/Intel-Shares-Gain-After-Report-on-Potential-Break-Up-49088812/ 
> 
> 
> Will Elon Musk also buy a piece of the cake?
> 
> Bye
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Woa! ChatGPT for the Flintstones: Bloomberg
>>
>> Our long-term investment in AI is already
>> available for fixed income securities.
>> Try it for yourself!
>> https://twitter.com/TheTerminal/status/1783473601632465352
>>
>> Did she just say Terminal? LoL
>>
>> Bye
>>
>> P.S.: But the display of the extracted logical
>> query from the natural language phrase is quite
>> cute. Can ChatGPT do the same?
>>
>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>> To hell with GPUs. Here come the FPGA qubits:
>>>
>>> Iran’s Military Quantum Claim: It’s Only 99.4% Ridiculous
>>> https://hackaday.com/2023/06/15/irans-quantum-computing-on-fpga-claim-its-kinda-a-thing/ 
>>>
>>>
>>> The superposition property enables a quantum computer
>>> to be in multiple states at once.
>>> https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/definition/qubit
>>>
>>> Maybe their new board is even less suited for hitting
>>> a ship with a torpedo than some machine learning?
>>>
>>
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14045 — Minimal Logics in the 2020's: A Meteoric Rise (Was: The road to Artificial Intelligence)

Could be a wake-up call this many participants
already in the commitee, that the whole logic
world was asleep for many years:

Non-Classical Logics. Theory and Applications XI,
5-8 September 2024, Lodz (Poland)
https://easychair.org/cfp/NCL24

Why is Minimal Logic at the core of many things?
Because it is the logic of Curry-Howard isomoprhism
for symple types:

----------------
Γ ∪ { A } ⊢ A

Γ ∪ { A } ⊢ B
----------------
Γ ⊢ A → B

Γ ⊢ A → B           Δ ⊢ A
----------------------------
Γ ∪ Δ ⊢ B

And funny things can happen, especially when people
hallucinate duality or think symmetry is given, for
example in newer inventions such as λμ-calculus,

but then omg ~~p => p is nevertheless not provable,
because they forgot an inference rule. LoL

Recommended reading so far:

Propositional Logics Related to Heyting’s and Johansson’s
February 2008 - Krister Segerberg
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228036664

The Logic of Church and Curry
Jonathan P. Seldin - 2009
https://www.sciencedirect.com/handbook/handbook-of-the-history-of-logic/vol/5/suppl/C

Meanwhile I am going back to my tinkering with my
Prolog system, which even provides a more primitive
logic than minimal logic, pure Prolog is minimal

logic without embedded implication.

Mild Shock schrieb:
> 
> Your new Scrum Master is here! - ChatGPT, 2023
> https://www.bbntimes.com/companies/ai-will-make-agile-coaches-and-scrum-masters-redundant-in-less-than-2-years
> 
> LoL
> 
> Thomas Alva Edison schrieb am Dienstag, 10. Juli 2018 um 15:28:05 UTC+2:
>> Prolog Class Signpost - American Style 2018
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxQKltWI0NA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14046 — The curse of Negri & Plato (Was: Minimal Logics in the 2020's: A Meteoric Rise)

Hi,

A few years ago I was impressed by
the output of either Negri or Plato,
or the two together.

Now they are just an annoyance, all
they show is that they are neither talented
nor have sufficient training.

Just have a look at:

 > Terminating intuitionistic calculus
 > Giulio Fellin and Sara Negri
 > https://philpapers.org/rec/FELATI

Beside the too obvious creative idea and motive
behind it, it is most likely complete useless
nonsense. Already this presentation in the

paper shows utter incompetence:

Γ, A → B ⊢ A           Γ, A → B, B ⊢ Δ
----------------------------------------
            Γ, A → B  ⊢ Δ

Everybody in the business knows that the
looping, resulting from the A → B copying,
is a fact. But can be reduced since the

copying on the right hand side is not needed.

Γ, A → B ⊢ A           Γ, B ⊢ Δ
--------------------------------
         Γ, A → B  ⊢ Δ

The above variant is enough. Just like Dragalin
presented the calculus. I really wish people
would completely understand these master pieces,

before they even touch multi consequent calculi:

Mathematical Intuitionism: Introduction to Proof Theory
Albert Grigorevich Dragalin - 1988
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0821845209

Contraction-Free Sequent Calculi for Intuitionistic Logic
Roy Dyckhoff - 1992
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~fp//courses/atp/cmuonly/D92.pdf

Whats the deeper semantic (sic!) explanation of the
two calculi GHPC and GCPC? I have a Kripke semantics
explanation in my notes, didn't release it yet.

Have Fun!

Mild Shock schrieb:
> 
> Could be a wake-up call this many participants
> already in the commitee, that the whole logic
> world was asleep for many years:
> 
> Non-Classical Logics. Theory and Applications XI,
> 5-8 September 2024, Lodz (Poland)
> https://easychair.org/cfp/NCL24
> 
> Why is Minimal Logic at the core of many things?
> Because it is the logic of Curry-Howard isomoprhism
> for symple types:
> 
> ----------------
> Γ ∪ { A } ⊢ A
> 
> Γ ∪ { A } ⊢ B
> ----------------
> Γ ⊢ A → B
> 
> Γ ⊢ A → B           Δ ⊢ A
> ----------------------------
> Γ ∪ Δ ⊢ B
> 
> And funny things can happen, especially when people
> hallucinate duality or think symmetry is given, for
> example in newer inventions such as λμ-calculus,
> 
> but then omg ~~p => p is nevertheless not provable,
> because they forgot an inference rule. LoL
> 
> Recommended reading so far:
> 
> Propositional Logics Related to Heyting’s and Johansson’s
> February 2008 - Krister Segerberg
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228036664
> 
> The Logic of Church and Curry
> Jonathan P. Seldin - 2009
> https://www.sciencedirect.com/handbook/handbook-of-the-history-of-logic/vol/5/suppl/C 
> 
> 
> Meanwhile I am going back to my tinkering with my
> Prolog system, which even provides a more primitive
> logic than minimal logic, pure Prolog is minimal
> 
> logic without embedded implication.
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>
>> Your new Scrum Master is here! - ChatGPT, 2023
>> https://www.bbntimes.com/companies/ai-will-make-agile-coaches-and-scrum-masters-redundant-in-less-than-2-years 
>>
>>
>> LoL
>>
>> Thomas Alva Edison schrieb am Dienstag, 10. Juli 2018 um 15:28:05 UTC+2:
>>> Prolog Class Signpost - American Style 2018
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxQKltWI0NA
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14047 — Re: The curse of Negri & Plato (Was: Minimal Logics in the 2020's: A Meteoric Rise)

Hi,

I am not halucinating that Negri is nonsense:

This calculus does not terminate (e.g. on Peirce’s
formula). Negri [42] shows how to add a loop-checking
mechanism to ensure termination. The effect on complexity
isn’t yet clear; but the loop-checking is expensive.

Intuitionistic Decision Procedures since Gentzen
The Jägerfest - 2013
https://apt13.unibe.ch/slides/Dyckhoff.pdf

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> A few years ago I was impressed by
> the output of either Negri or Plato,
> or the two together.
> 
> Now they are just an annoyance, all
> they show is that they are neither talented
> nor have sufficient training.
> 
> Just have a look at:
> 
>  > Terminating intuitionistic calculus
>  > Giulio Fellin and Sara Negri
>  > https://philpapers.org/rec/FELATI
> 
> Beside the too obvious creative idea and motive
> behind it, it is most likely complete useless
> nonsense. Already this presentation in the
> 
> paper shows utter incompetence:
> 
> Γ, A → B ⊢ A           Γ, A → B, B ⊢ Δ
> ----------------------------------------
>             Γ, A → B  ⊢ Δ
> 
> Everybody in the business knows that the
> looping, resulting from the A → B copying,
> is a fact. But can be reduced since the
> 
> copying on the right hand side is not needed.
> 
> Γ, A → B ⊢ A           Γ, B ⊢ Δ
> --------------------------------
>          Γ, A → B  ⊢ Δ
> 
> The above variant is enough. Just like Dragalin
> presented the calculus. I really wish people
> would completely understand these master pieces,
> 
> before they even touch multi consequent calculi:
> 
> Mathematical Intuitionism: Introduction to Proof Theory
> Albert Grigorevich Dragalin - 1988
> https://www.amazon.com/dp/0821845209
> 
> Contraction-Free Sequent Calculi for Intuitionistic Logic
> Roy Dyckhoff - 1992
> http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~fp//courses/atp/cmuonly/D92.pdf
> 
> Whats the deeper semantic (sic!) explanation of the
> two calculi GHPC and GCPC? I have a Kripke semantics
> explanation in my notes, didn't release it yet.
> 
> Have Fun!
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>
>> Could be a wake-up call this many participants
>> already in the commitee, that the whole logic
>> world was asleep for many years:
>>
>> Non-Classical Logics. Theory and Applications XI,
>> 5-8 September 2024, Lodz (Poland)
>> https://easychair.org/cfp/NCL24
>>
>> Why is Minimal Logic at the core of many things?
>> Because it is the logic of Curry-Howard isomoprhism
>> for symple types:
>>
>> ----------------
>> Γ ∪ { A } ⊢ A
>>
>> Γ ∪ { A } ⊢ B
>> ----------------
>> Γ ⊢ A → B
>>
>> Γ ⊢ A → B           Δ ⊢ A
>> ----------------------------
>> Γ ∪ Δ ⊢ B
>>
>> And funny things can happen, especially when people
>> hallucinate duality or think symmetry is given, for
>> example in newer inventions such as λμ-calculus,
>>
>> but then omg ~~p => p is nevertheless not provable,
>> because they forgot an inference rule. LoL
>>
>> Recommended reading so far:
>>
>> Propositional Logics Related to Heyting’s and Johansson’s
>> February 2008 - Krister Segerberg
>> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228036664
>>
>> The Logic of Church and Curry
>> Jonathan P. Seldin - 2009
>> https://www.sciencedirect.com/handbook/handbook-of-the-history-of-logic/vol/5/suppl/C 
>>
>>
>> Meanwhile I am going back to my tinkering with my
>> Prolog system, which even provides a more primitive
>> logic than minimal logic, pure Prolog is minimal
>>
>> logic without embedded implication.
>>
>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>
>>> Your new Scrum Master is here! - ChatGPT, 2023
>>> https://www.bbntimes.com/companies/ai-will-make-agile-coaches-and-scrum-masters-redundant-in-less-than-2-years 
>>>
>>>
>>> LoL
>>>
>>> Thomas Alva Edison schrieb am Dienstag, 10. Juli 2018 um 15:28:05 UTC+2:
>>>> Prolog Class Signpost - American Style 2018
>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxQKltWI0NA
>>
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14057 — Euklid: Am I a joke to you? (Re: The curse of Negri & Plato)

Hi,

Generally speaking it is not “elements” if
its only classical logic:

 > Plato (p. 83 of Elements of Logical
 > Reasoning) … excellent book

The ancient Greek had a well developed sense
of constructivity in their geometry, for example
they distinguished between compass-and-straightedge
constructions, and neuseis constructions.

Constructive logic somehow appeals to this sense,
but its not the only way to do non-classical logics.
In a broader sense in mathematical logic its just
the same discipline as the axiomatic method which

is already found in Euklids geometry but applied
to logic itself. Now it is evident, by the correspondence
that I had, that there are people employed in philosophy
departments saying a A <=> B is void if we have:

CL |- A
CL |- B
-------------------
CL |- A <=> B

They never played the axiomatic method and replaced
classical logic (CL) by something else. Lets make an
example from Euclids geometry. Thales theorem and
Pythagroas theorem are both true? So they are equivalent?

So why bother even write a booklet like Euklid elements?

if you need to find the center of a circle
https://youtube.com/shorts/iQeFCnSo41g

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> I am not halucinating that Negri is nonsense:
> 
> This calculus does not terminate (e.g. on Peirce’s
> formula). Negri [42] shows how to add a loop-checking
> mechanism to ensure termination. The effect on complexity
> isn’t yet clear; but the loop-checking is expensive.
> 
> Intuitionistic Decision Procedures since Gentzen
> The Jägerfest - 2013
> https://apt13.unibe.ch/slides/Dyckhoff.pdf
> 
> Bye

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14048 — Re: Minimal Logics in the 2020's: A Meteoric Rise (Was: The road to Artificial Intelligence)

The meteoric rise of Curry-Howard isomorphism
and minimal logic, possibly because proof assistants
such as Lean, Agda, etc… all use it, is quite ironic,
in the light of this statement:

 > Because of the vagueness of the notions of “constructive
 > proof”, “constructive operation”, the BHK-interpretation
 > has never become a versatile technical tool in the way
 > classical semantics has. Perhaps it is correct to say
 > that by most people the BHK-interpretation has never been
 > seen as an intuitionistic counterpart to classical semantics.
 > https://festschriften.illc.uva.nl/j50/contribs/troelstra/troelstra.pdf

Mild Shock schrieb:
> 
> Could be a wake-up call this many participants
> already in the commitee, that the whole logic
> world was asleep for many years:
> 
> Non-Classical Logics. Theory and Applications XI,
> 5-8 September 2024, Lodz (Poland)
> https://easychair.org/cfp/NCL24
> 
> Why is Minimal Logic at the core of many things?
> Because it is the logic of Curry-Howard isomoprhism
> for symple types:
> 
> ----------------
> Γ ∪ { A } ⊢ A
> 
> Γ ∪ { A } ⊢ B
> ----------------
> Γ ⊢ A → B
> 
> Γ ⊢ A → B           Δ ⊢ A
> ----------------------------
> Γ ∪ Δ ⊢ B
> 
> And funny things can happen, especially when people
> hallucinate duality or think symmetry is given, for
> example in newer inventions such as λμ-calculus,
> 
> but then omg ~~p => p is nevertheless not provable,
> because they forgot an inference rule. LoL
> 
> Recommended reading so far:
> 
> Propositional Logics Related to Heyting’s and Johansson’s
> February 2008 - Krister Segerberg
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228036664
> 
> The Logic of Church and Curry
> Jonathan P. Seldin - 2009
> https://www.sciencedirect.com/handbook/handbook-of-the-history-of-logic/vol/5/suppl/C 
> 
> 
> Meanwhile I am going back to my tinkering with my
> Prolog system, which even provides a more primitive
> logic than minimal logic, pure Prolog is minimal
> 
> logic without embedded implication.
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>
>> Your new Scrum Master is here! - ChatGPT, 2023
>> https://www.bbntimes.com/companies/ai-will-make-agile-coaches-and-scrum-masters-redundant-in-less-than-2-years 
>>
>>
>> LoL
>>
>> Thomas Alva Edison schrieb am Dienstag, 10. Juli 2018 um 15:28:05 UTC+2:
>>> Prolog Class Signpost - American Style 2018
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxQKltWI0NA
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14049 — Re: Minimal Logics in the 2020's: A Meteoric Rise (Was: The road to Artificial Intelligence)

Hi,

There are possibly issues of interdisciplinary
work. For example Sorensen & Urzyczyn in their
Lectures on the Curry-Howard Isomorphism say that
the logic LP has no name in literature.

On the other hand Segerbergs paper, shows that
a logic LP, in his labeling JP, that stems from
accepting Peice's Law is equivalent to a logic
accepting Curry's Refutation rule,

i.e the logic JE with:

      Γ, A => B |- A
     -----------------
          Γ |- A

But the logic JE also implies that LEM was added!

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> The meteoric rise of Curry-Howard isomorphism
> and minimal logic, possibly because proof assistants
> such as Lean, Agda, etc… all use it, is quite ironic,
> in the light of this statement:
> 
>  > Because of the vagueness of the notions of “constructive
>  > proof”, “constructive operation”, the BHK-interpretation
>  > has never become a versatile technical tool in the way
>  > classical semantics has. Perhaps it is correct to say
>  > that by most people the BHK-interpretation has never been
>  > seen as an intuitionistic counterpart to classical semantics.
>  > https://festschriften.illc.uva.nl/j50/contribs/troelstra/troelstra.pdf
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>
>> Could be a wake-up call this many participants
>> already in the commitee, that the whole logic
>> world was asleep for many years:
>>
>> Non-Classical Logics. Theory and Applications XI,
>> 5-8 September 2024, Lodz (Poland)
>> https://easychair.org/cfp/NCL24
>>
>> Why is Minimal Logic at the core of many things?
>> Because it is the logic of Curry-Howard isomoprhism
>> for symple types:
>>
>> ----------------
>> Γ ∪ { A } ⊢ A
>>
>> Γ ∪ { A } ⊢ B
>> ----------------
>> Γ ⊢ A → B
>>
>> Γ ⊢ A → B           Δ ⊢ A
>> ----------------------------
>> Γ ∪ Δ ⊢ B
>>
>> And funny things can happen, especially when people
>> hallucinate duality or think symmetry is given, for
>> example in newer inventions such as λμ-calculus,
>>
>> but then omg ~~p => p is nevertheless not provable,
>> because they forgot an inference rule. LoL
>>
>> Recommended reading so far:
>>
>> Propositional Logics Related to Heyting’s and Johansson’s
>> February 2008 - Krister Segerberg
>> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228036664
>>
>> The Logic of Church and Curry
>> Jonathan P. Seldin - 2009
>> https://www.sciencedirect.com/handbook/handbook-of-the-history-of-logic/vol/5/suppl/C 
>>
>>
>> Meanwhile I am going back to my tinkering with my
>> Prolog system, which even provides a more primitive
>> logic than minimal logic, pure Prolog is minimal
>>
>> logic without embedded implication.
>>
>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>
>>> Your new Scrum Master is here! - ChatGPT, 2023
>>> https://www.bbntimes.com/companies/ai-will-make-agile-coaches-and-scrum-masters-redundant-in-less-than-2-years 
>>>
>>>
>>> LoL
>>>
>>> Thomas Alva Edison schrieb am Dienstag, 10. Juli 2018 um 15:28:05 UTC+2:
>>>> Prolog Class Signpost - American Style 2018
>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxQKltWI0NA
>>
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14050 — Re: Minimal Logics in the 2020's: A Meteoric Rise (Was: The road to Artificial Intelligence)

Hi,

This has only become talk of the town recently
under the heading of Constructive S4 Modal Logic
or CS4. It somehow demonstrates that prejudice

against computer science, like lambda calculus is
too abstract, is possibly unfounded. The challenge
would be to draw connections and foster inter-

disciplinary dialog. The next challenge would
be to distill a simple didactical extract of it
and draw road maps!

Categorical and Kripke Semantics for Constructive S4 Modal Logic
Alechina et al. - 2003
https://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/~exr/papers/csl01.pdf

What they call fallible worlds, does Segerberg
1968 call abnormal worlds.

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> There are possibly issues of interdisciplinary
> work. For example Sorensen & Urzyczyn in their
> Lectures on the Curry-Howard Isomorphism say that
> the logic LP has no name in literature.
> 
> On the other hand Segerbergs paper, shows that
> a logic LP, in his labeling JP, that stems from
> accepting Peice's Law is equivalent to a logic
> accepting Curry's Refutation rule,
> 
> i.e the logic JE with:
> 
>       Γ, A => B |- A
>      -----------------
>           Γ |- A
> 
> But the logic JE also implies that LEM was added!
> 
> Bye
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>> The meteoric rise of Curry-Howard isomorphism
>> and minimal logic, possibly because proof assistants
>> such as Lean, Agda, etc… all use it, is quite ironic,
>> in the light of this statement:
>>
>>  > Because of the vagueness of the notions of “constructive
>>  > proof”, “constructive operation”, the BHK-interpretation
>>  > has never become a versatile technical tool in the way
>>  > classical semantics has. Perhaps it is correct to say
>>  > that by most people the BHK-interpretation has never been
>>  > seen as an intuitionistic counterpart to classical semantics.
>>  > https://festschriften.illc.uva.nl/j50/contribs/troelstra/troelstra.pdf
>>
>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>
>>> Could be a wake-up call this many participants
>>> already in the commitee, that the whole logic
>>> world was asleep for many years:
>>>
>>> Non-Classical Logics. Theory and Applications XI,
>>> 5-8 September 2024, Lodz (Poland)
>>> https://easychair.org/cfp/NCL24
>>>
>>> Why is Minimal Logic at the core of many things?
>>> Because it is the logic of Curry-Howard isomoprhism
>>> for symple types:
>>>
>>> ----------------
>>> Γ ∪ { A } ⊢ A
>>>
>>> Γ ∪ { A } ⊢ B
>>> ----------------
>>> Γ ⊢ A → B
>>>
>>> Γ ⊢ A → B           Δ ⊢ A
>>> ----------------------------
>>> Γ ∪ Δ ⊢ B
>>>
>>> And funny things can happen, especially when people
>>> hallucinate duality or think symmetry is given, for
>>> example in newer inventions such as λμ-calculus,
>>>
>>> but then omg ~~p => p is nevertheless not provable,
>>> because they forgot an inference rule. LoL
>>>
>>> Recommended reading so far:
>>>
>>> Propositional Logics Related to Heyting’s and Johansson’s
>>> February 2008 - Krister Segerberg
>>> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228036664
>>>
>>> The Logic of Church and Curry
>>> Jonathan P. Seldin - 2009
>>> https://www.sciencedirect.com/handbook/handbook-of-the-history-of-logic/vol/5/suppl/C 
>>>
>>>
>>> Meanwhile I am going back to my tinkering with my
>>> Prolog system, which even provides a more primitive
>>> logic than minimal logic, pure Prolog is minimal
>>>
>>> logic without embedded implication.
>>>
>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>>
>>>> Your new Scrum Master is here! - ChatGPT, 2023
>>>> https://www.bbntimes.com/companies/ai-will-make-agile-coaches-and-scrum-masters-redundant-in-less-than-2-years 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> LoL
>>>>
>>>> Thomas Alva Edison schrieb am Dienstag, 10. Juli 2018 um 15:28:05 
>>>> UTC+2:
>>>>> Prolog Class Signpost - American Style 2018
>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxQKltWI0NA
>>>
>>
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14053 — French Philosophy in 2024 (Was: Minimal Logics in the 2020's: A Meteoric Rise)

Hi,

Now I had an extremly resilient correspondent, who
wants to do proof extraction, but at the same
time refuses to learn the Curry-Howard isomorphism.

But its so easy, was just watching:

Hyperon Session with Dr. Ben Goertzel
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Uy3j4WCiXQ

At t=1853 he mentions C. S. Peirce thirdness, which
you can use to explain the Curry-Howard isomorphism:


1 *\        Γ = Context
   | \
   |  * 3    t = λ-Expression
   | /
2 */        α = Type


The above is a trikonic visualization of the judgement
Γ |- t : α, applying the art of making three-fold divisions.

But I guess C. S. Peirce is not read in France, since
it requires English. Or maybe there is a french translation?

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> 
> Could be a wake-up call this many participants
> already in the commitee, that the whole logic
> world was asleep for many years:
> 
> Non-Classical Logics. Theory and Applications XI,
> 5-8 September 2024, Lodz (Poland)
> https://easychair.org/cfp/NCL24
> 
> Why is Minimal Logic at the core of many things?
> Because it is the logic of Curry-Howard isomoprhism
> for symple types:
> 
> ----------------
> Γ ∪ { A } ⊢ A
> 
> Γ ∪ { A } ⊢ B
> ----------------
> Γ ⊢ A → B
> 
> Γ ⊢ A → B           Δ ⊢ A
> ----------------------------
> Γ ∪ Δ ⊢ B
> 
> And funny things can happen, especially when people
> hallucinate duality or think symmetry is given, for
> example in newer inventions such as λμ-calculus,
> 
> but then omg ~~p => p is nevertheless not provable,
> because they forgot an inference rule. LoL
> 
> Recommended reading so far:
> 
> Propositional Logics Related to Heyting’s and Johansson’s
> February 2008 - Krister Segerberg
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228036664
> 
> The Logic of Church and Curry
> Jonathan P. Seldin - 2009
> https://www.sciencedirect.com/handbook/handbook-of-the-history-of-logic/vol/5/suppl/C 
> 
> 
> Meanwhile I am going back to my tinkering with my
> Prolog system, which even provides a more primitive
> logic than minimal logic, pure Prolog is minimal
> 
> logic without embedded implication.
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>
>> Your new Scrum Master is here! - ChatGPT, 2023
>> https://www.bbntimes.com/companies/ai-will-make-agile-coaches-and-scrum-masters-redundant-in-less-than-2-years 
>>
>>
>> LoL
>>
>> Thomas Alva Edison schrieb am Dienstag, 10. Juli 2018 um 15:28:05 UTC+2:
>>> Prolog Class Signpost - American Style 2018
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxQKltWI0NA
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14054 — Re: French Philosophy in 2024 (Was: Minimal Logics in the 2020's: A Meteoric Rise)

Hi,

Actually thridness is not only the art of making
three-fold divisions. Usually one aims a finding
a 3 that is the relation between 1 and 2, so that

we have this relation satisfied:

    3(1, 2)

Of course we can have the stance, and say that |-
does that already. Only |- is highly ambigious,
if you see Γ |- α you don't know what was the last

inference rule applied. But for proof extraction
you want exactly know that.

Bye

P.S.: And Peirce isn't wrong when he says thirdness
is enough, just take set theory, which can do all
of mathematics? Its based on  this thirdness only:

    x ∈ y

The set membership. But set membership is as ugly as |-,
it also doesn't say why an element belongs to a set.

LoL

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> Now I had an extremly resilient correspondent, who
> wants to do proof extraction, but at the same
> time refuses to learn the Curry-Howard isomorphism.
> 
> But its so easy, was just watching:
> 
> Hyperon Session with Dr. Ben Goertzel
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Uy3j4WCiXQ
> 
> At t=1853 he mentions C. S. Peirce thirdness, which
> you can use to explain the Curry-Howard isomorphism:
> 
> 
> 1 *\        Γ = Context
>    | \
>    |  * 3    t = λ-Expression
>    | /
> 2 */        α = Type
> 
> 
> The above is a trikonic visualization of the judgement
> Γ |- t : α, applying the art of making three-fold divisions.
> 
> But I guess C. S. Peirce is not read in France, since
> it requires English. Or maybe there is a french translation?
> 
> Bye
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>
>> Could be a wake-up call this many participants
>> already in the commitee, that the whole logic
>> world was asleep for many years:
>>
>> Non-Classical Logics. Theory and Applications XI,
>> 5-8 September 2024, Lodz (Poland)
>> https://easychair.org/cfp/NCL24
>>
>> Why is Minimal Logic at the core of many things?
>> Because it is the logic of Curry-Howard isomoprhism
>> for symple types:
>>
>> ----------------
>> Γ ∪ { A } ⊢ A
>>
>> Γ ∪ { A } ⊢ B
>> ----------------
>> Γ ⊢ A → B
>>
>> Γ ⊢ A → B           Δ ⊢ A
>> ----------------------------
>> Γ ∪ Δ ⊢ B
>>
>> And funny things can happen, especially when people
>> hallucinate duality or think symmetry is given, for
>> example in newer inventions such as λμ-calculus,
>>
>> but then omg ~~p => p is nevertheless not provable,
>> because they forgot an inference rule. LoL
>>
>> Recommended reading so far:
>>
>> Propositional Logics Related to Heyting’s and Johansson’s
>> February 2008 - Krister Segerberg
>> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228036664
>>
>> The Logic of Church and Curry
>> Jonathan P. Seldin - 2009
>> https://www.sciencedirect.com/handbook/handbook-of-the-history-of-logic/vol/5/suppl/C 
>>
>>
>> Meanwhile I am going back to my tinkering with my
>> Prolog system, which even provides a more primitive
>> logic than minimal logic, pure Prolog is minimal
>>
>> logic without embedded implication.
>>
>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>
>>> Your new Scrum Master is here! - ChatGPT, 2023
>>> https://www.bbntimes.com/companies/ai-will-make-agile-coaches-and-scrum-masters-redundant-in-less-than-2-years 
>>>
>>>
>>> LoL
>>>
>>> Thomas Alva Edison schrieb am Dienstag, 10. Juli 2018 um 15:28:05 UTC+2:
>>>> Prolog Class Signpost - American Style 2018
>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxQKltWI0NA
>>
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14055 — Corona isn't over 2024 (Was: French Philosophy in 2024)

Hi,

In 2023 Dr. Ben Goertzel praised back to
normal, today in 2024 everybody has mysterious
eyeinfections and a new wave is reported:

Flirt-Varianten: Sommer-Coronawelle nimmt Fahrt auf
https://www.mdr.de/wissen/medizin-gesundheit/corona-fallzahlen-sommerwelle-100.html

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> Actually thridness is not only the art of making
> three-fold divisions. Usually one aims a finding
> a 3 that is the relation between 1 and 2, so that
> 
> we have this relation satisfied:
> 
>     3(1, 2)
> 
> Of course we can have the stance, and say that |-
> does that already. Only |- is highly ambigious,
> if you see Γ |- α you don't know what was the last
> 
> inference rule applied. But for proof extraction
> you want exactly know that.
> 
> Bye
> 
> P.S.: And Peirce isn't wrong when he says thirdness
> is enough, just take set theory, which can do all
> of mathematics? Its based on  this thirdness only:
> 
>     x ∈ y
> 
> The set membership. But set membership is as ugly as |-,
> it also doesn't say why an element belongs to a set.
> 
> LoL
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Now I had an extremly resilient correspondent, who
>> wants to do proof extraction, but at the same
>> time refuses to learn the Curry-Howard isomorphism.
>>
>> But its so easy, was just watching:
>>
>> Hyperon Session with Dr. Ben Goertzel
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Uy3j4WCiXQ
>>
>> At t=1853 he mentions C. S. Peirce thirdness, which
>> you can use to explain the Curry-Howard isomorphism:
>>
>>
>> 1 *\        Γ = Context
>>    | \
>>    |  * 3    t = λ-Expression
>>    | /
>> 2 */        α = Type
>>
>>
>> The above is a trikonic visualization of the judgement
>> Γ |- t : α, applying the art of making three-fold divisions.
>>
>> But I guess C. S. Peirce is not read in France, since
>> it requires English. Or maybe there is a french translation?
>>
>> Bye
>>
>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>
>>> Could be a wake-up call this many participants
>>> already in the commitee, that the whole logic
>>> world was asleep for many years:
>>>
>>> Non-Classical Logics. Theory and Applications XI,
>>> 5-8 September 2024, Lodz (Poland)
>>> https://easychair.org/cfp/NCL24
>>>
>>> Why is Minimal Logic at the core of many things?
>>> Because it is the logic of Curry-Howard isomoprhism
>>> for symple types:
>>>
>>> ----------------
>>> Γ ∪ { A } ⊢ A
>>>
>>> Γ ∪ { A } ⊢ B
>>> ----------------
>>> Γ ⊢ A → B
>>>
>>> Γ ⊢ A → B           Δ ⊢ A
>>> ----------------------------
>>> Γ ∪ Δ ⊢ B
>>>
>>> And funny things can happen, especially when people
>>> hallucinate duality or think symmetry is given, for
>>> example in newer inventions such as λμ-calculus,
>>>
>>> but then omg ~~p => p is nevertheless not provable,
>>> because they forgot an inference rule. LoL
>>>
>>> Recommended reading so far:
>>>
>>> Propositional Logics Related to Heyting’s and Johansson’s
>>> February 2008 - Krister Segerberg
>>> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228036664
>>>
>>> The Logic of Church and Curry
>>> Jonathan P. Seldin - 2009
>>> https://www.sciencedirect.com/handbook/handbook-of-the-history-of-logic/vol/5/suppl/C 
>>>
>>>
>>> Meanwhile I am going back to my tinkering with my
>>> Prolog system, which even provides a more primitive
>>> logic than minimal logic, pure Prolog is minimal
>>>
>>> logic without embedded implication.
>>>
>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>>
>>>> Your new Scrum Master is here! - ChatGPT, 2023
>>>> https://www.bbntimes.com/companies/ai-will-make-agile-coaches-and-scrum-masters-redundant-in-less-than-2-years 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> LoL
>>>>
>>>> Thomas Alva Edison schrieb am Dienstag, 10. Juli 2018 um 15:28:05 
>>>> UTC+2:
>>>>> Prolog Class Signpost - American Style 2018
>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxQKltWI0NA
>>>
>>
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14056 — Re: Corona isn't over 2024 (Was: French Philosophy in 2024)

Hi,

Forget face masks, it might be the
beginning of a new experience for the world!

Coronaviruses are oculotropic
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7241406/

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> In 2023 Dr. Ben Goertzel praised back to
> normal, today in 2024 everybody has mysterious
> eyeinfections and a new wave is reported:
> 
> Flirt-Varianten: Sommer-Coronawelle nimmt Fahrt auf
> https://www.mdr.de/wissen/medizin-gesundheit/corona-fallzahlen-sommerwelle-100.html 
> 
> 
> Bye
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Actually thridness is not only the art of making
>> three-fold divisions. Usually one aims a finding
>> a 3 that is the relation between 1 and 2, so that
>>
>> we have this relation satisfied:
>>
>>     3(1, 2)
>>
>> Of course we can have the stance, and say that |-
>> does that already. Only |- is highly ambigious,
>> if you see Γ |- α you don't know what was the last
>>
>> inference rule applied. But for proof extraction
>> you want exactly know that.
>>
>> Bye
>>
>> P.S.: And Peirce isn't wrong when he says thirdness
>> is enough, just take set theory, which can do all
>> of mathematics? Its based on  this thirdness only:
>>
>>     x ∈ y
>>
>> The set membership. But set membership is as ugly as |-,
>> it also doesn't say why an element belongs to a set.
>>
>> LoL
>>
>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Now I had an extremly resilient correspondent, who
>>> wants to do proof extraction, but at the same
>>> time refuses to learn the Curry-Howard isomorphism.
>>>
>>> But its so easy, was just watching:
>>>
>>> Hyperon Session with Dr. Ben Goertzel
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Uy3j4WCiXQ
>>>
>>> At t=1853 he mentions C. S. Peirce thirdness, which
>>> you can use to explain the Curry-Howard isomorphism:
>>>
>>>
>>> 1 *\        Γ = Context
>>>    | \
>>>    |  * 3    t = λ-Expression
>>>    | /
>>> 2 */        α = Type
>>>
>>>
>>> The above is a trikonic visualization of the judgement
>>> Γ |- t : α, applying the art of making three-fold divisions.
>>>
>>> But I guess C. S. Peirce is not read in France, since
>>> it requires English. Or maybe there is a french translation?
>>>
>>> Bye
>>>
>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>>
>>>> Could be a wake-up call this many participants
>>>> already in the commitee, that the whole logic
>>>> world was asleep for many years:
>>>>
>>>> Non-Classical Logics. Theory and Applications XI,
>>>> 5-8 September 2024, Lodz (Poland)
>>>> https://easychair.org/cfp/NCL24
>>>>
>>>> Why is Minimal Logic at the core of many things?
>>>> Because it is the logic of Curry-Howard isomoprhism
>>>> for symple types:
>>>>
>>>> ----------------
>>>> Γ ∪ { A } ⊢ A
>>>>
>>>> Γ ∪ { A } ⊢ B
>>>> ----------------
>>>> Γ ⊢ A → B
>>>>
>>>> Γ ⊢ A → B           Δ ⊢ A
>>>> ----------------------------
>>>> Γ ∪ Δ ⊢ B
>>>>
>>>> And funny things can happen, especially when people
>>>> hallucinate duality or think symmetry is given, for
>>>> example in newer inventions such as λμ-calculus,
>>>>
>>>> but then omg ~~p => p is nevertheless not provable,
>>>> because they forgot an inference rule. LoL
>>>>
>>>> Recommended reading so far:
>>>>
>>>> Propositional Logics Related to Heyting’s and Johansson’s
>>>> February 2008 - Krister Segerberg
>>>> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228036664
>>>>
>>>> The Logic of Church and Curry
>>>> Jonathan P. Seldin - 2009
>>>> https://www.sciencedirect.com/handbook/handbook-of-the-history-of-logic/vol/5/suppl/C 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Meanwhile I am going back to my tinkering with my
>>>> Prolog system, which even provides a more primitive
>>>> logic than minimal logic, pure Prolog is minimal
>>>>
>>>> logic without embedded implication.
>>>>
>>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>>>
>>>>> Your new Scrum Master is here! - ChatGPT, 2023
>>>>> https://www.bbntimes.com/companies/ai-will-make-agile-coaches-and-scrum-masters-redundant-in-less-than-2-years 
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> LoL
>>>>>
>>>>> Thomas Alva Edison schrieb am Dienstag, 10. Juli 2018 um 15:28:05 
>>>>> UTC+2:
>>>>>> Prolog Class Signpost - American Style 2018
>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxQKltWI0NA
>>>>
>>>
>>
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14058 — The error in Jan von Platos presentation (Re: Minimal Logics in the 2020's: A Meteoric Rise)

The sad news is, the book is only
worth some fire wood.

Plato (p. 83 of Elements of Logical Reasoning

Interestingly the book uses non-classical
logic, since it says:

 > Sequent calculus offers a good possibility for
 > exhaustive proof search in propositional logic:
 > We can check through all the possibilities for
 > malking a derivation. If none of them worked,
 > i.e., if each had at least one branch in which
 > no rule applied and no initial sequent was reached,
 > the given sequent is underivable. The
 > symbol |/-, is used for underivability.

And then it has unprovable:

c. |/- A v ~A

d. |/- ~~A => A

But mostlikely the book has a blind spot, some
serious errors, or totally unfounded claims, since
for example with such a calculus, the unprovability
of Peirce’s Law cannot be shown so easily.

Exhaustive proof search will usually not terminate.
There are some terminating calculi, like Dyckhoffs
LJT, but a naive calculus based on Gentzens take
will not terminate.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.prolog

csiph-web