Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > de.sci.mathematik > #143850
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | de.sci.mathematik |
| Subject | Six Proofs and Generally Inteligent Systems [EyeProlog Pseudo Scientism] |
| Date | 2026-08-15 15:27 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <115ppff$gu6g$1@solani.org> (permalink) |
Hi,
Years ago Sam Altman said to have no idea how
to generate revenue, but when the generally
intelligent system is in place, he might ask it.
Some schools approach the “generality” from
a totally wrong perspective. Take the EyeProlog
Pseudo Scientism here:
The Art of EyeProlog
https://eyereasoner.github.io/eyeprolog/the-art-of-eyeprolog
It is the same nonsense like constraint propagation,
the idea here is to evolve better software, that it
has as a main component refinement:
Start -> Algo1 -> Algo2 -> Algo3 -> Algo4 ...
But EyeProlog itself is an example of not using
this refinement. Like dropping the classical
WAM architecture, and back to YieldProlog somehow.
What if the world ticks like this
when it come to generality:
/-> Algo1
/--> Algo2
Start ---> Algo3
\--> Algo4
\-> ...
Innovation requires to start from scratch.
I think this little booklet, recommended by
Ernst Specker, Proofs from THE BOOK is a
book of mathematical proofs by Martin Aigner
and Günter M. Ziegler, first published in 1998.
Just wants to teach us about this bifurcation:
Chapter 1: Six proofs of the infinity of
the primes, including Euclid's and Furstenberg's.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proofs_from_THE_BOOK
Yeah, lets aim for surprises by
generative AI, not refinement.
Bye
See also:
Sam Altman on his Business Model
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/pLnyjxgFxew
Back to de.sci.mathematik | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread
Six Proofs and Generally Inteligent Systems [EyeProlog Pseudo Scientism] Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-15 15:27 +0200
csiph-web