Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #160170
| From | "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | alt.folklore.computers |
| Subject | Re: The True Aficionado? |
| Date | 2016-02-25 03:14 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dj636mF8rkkU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | (16 earlier) <PM00052C491492A67D@aca432a0.ipt.aol.com> <c9c02d21-cd06-4ad8-ad41-83bd28addd6f@googlegroups.com> <PM00052C5C2FA4288E@aca40f57.ipt.aol.com> <dj3jt5Fk3r9U1@mid.individual.net> <PM00052C8429A98276@aca2d65f.ipt.aol.com> |
"jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message news:PM00052C8429A98276@aca2d65f.ipt.aol.com... > hgww wrote: >> >> >> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message >> news:PM00052C5C2FA4288E@aca40f57.ipt.aol.com... >>> mentificium@gmail.com wrote: >>>> On Sunday, February 21, 2016 at 7:47:17 AM UTC-8, jmfbahciv wrote: >>>>> mentificium@gmail.com wrote: >>>>> > On Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 7:18:27 AM UTC-8, jmfbahciv wrote: >>>>> >> mentificium@gmail.com wrote: >>>>> >> > On Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 3:11:47 AM UTC-8, gareth wrote: >>>>> >> >> <mentificium@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>> >> >> news:7b1b2b26-e594-433c-b2bf-963bd4324c24@googlegroups.com... >>>>> >> >> > On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 5:33:57 AM UTC-8, gareth >>>>> >> >> > wrote: >>>>> >> >> >> The True Aficionad is interested in the computer itself as a >>>>> wonderful >>>>> >> >> >> machine and not in any uses to which it might be put. >>>>> >> >> > The True Afficionado is interested in the ultimate >>>>> >> >> > apotheosis of the computer which is AI. >>>>> >> >> >>>>> >> >> Encapsulating your own thinking into a machine is not AI, but >>>>> >> >> merely a repository of your own thoughts. >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> > Very true -- but creating a machine that can think its own >>>>> >> > thoughts >>>>> >> > is Strong AI and a branching of psychological evolution. >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> So your idea of an AI machine is one >>>>> >> whose processes are not reproducible? >>>>> > ^^^^^ >>>>> > If "whose" applies here (and it does :-) >>>>> > thank you for conceding that the AI machine >>>>> > is a "who" -- a person. >>>>> >>>>> You are the one with that premise. Now answer the question. >>>>> >>>>> /BAH >>>> >>>> The AI that I am creating in Perl at >>>> >>>> http://ai.neocities.org/perlmind.txt >>>> >>>> is a combination of my four previous AI Minds: >>>> >>>> http://www.nlg-wiki.org/systems/Mind.Forth in English; >>>> >>>> http://www.nlg-wiki.org/systems/Wotan in German; >>>> >>>> http://www.nlg-wiki.org/systems/Mind in English; >>>> >>>> http://www.nlg-wiki.org/systems/Dushka in Russian. >>>> >>>> The processes of the AI Mind are "reproducible" >>>> only up to a point. If no user input is entered >>>> into the AI Mind, its processes are deterministic >>>> and therefore reproducible. But user input is a >>>> jumble of randomness, and so an AI life is not >>>> reproducible any more than a human life is. >>> >>> So how do you debug a problem? How do you determine >>> that a fix really fixes the bug if you can't reproduce it? >>> >>>> >>>> Btw (by the way) I hope to provide an orignal >>>> "prior art" AI that leads to a kind of >>>> "pre-Cambrian explosion" of AI life-forms. >>>> >>>> By calling the Perl AI "Ghost", I hint at >>>> the idea of "The Ghost in the Machine" and >>>> at "The Soul of a New Machine" by T. Kidder. >>> >>> I can tell you that the soul of a machine is a conglomerate >>> of the developers and other workers who did the work >>> to produce the hard/software. >> >> That's not really true of those who do the donkey >> work like say wire wrapping the backplane with >> stuff of your generation. > > It's especially true in this case. Bullshit. Those are no different to the machines that replaced them later.
Back to alt.folklore.computers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
The True Aficionado? "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-02-18 13:33 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? mentificium@gmail.com - 2016-02-19 20:42 -0800
Re: The True Aficionado? "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-02-20 11:11 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? mentificium@gmail.com - 2016-02-20 05:06 -0800
Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-20 15:18 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? mentificium@gmail.com - 2016-02-20 15:11 -0800
Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-21 15:48 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? mentificium@gmail.com - 2016-02-21 13:43 -0800
Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-23 13:13 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? mentificium@gmail.com - 2016-02-23 06:06 -0800
Re: The True Aficionado? "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-24 04:40 +1100
Re: The True Aficionado? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-23 09:50 -0800
Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-24 13:40 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 03:14 +1100
Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-01 13:55 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-03-02 01:30 +1100
Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-02 14:19 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 03:51 +1100
Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-03 13:39 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-03 16:18 +0100
Re: The True Aficionado? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 03:52 +1100
Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-04 13:22 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-04 16:33 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-03-04 15:47 -0600
Re: The True Aficionado? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-05 01:04 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-05 13:57 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-06 11:40 -0800
Re: The True Aficionado? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-06 23:18 -0600
Re: The True Aficionado? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-04 17:18 +0100
Re: The True Aficionado? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-03-04 22:09 -0500
Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-05 13:57 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-03-05 14:36 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-06 14:08 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-07 02:03 +1100
Re: The True Aficionado? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-06 17:28 +0100
Re: The True Aficionado? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-06 11:54 -0800
Re: The True Aficionado? "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-07 07:39 +1100
Re: The True Aficionado? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-06 17:24 -0700
Re: The True Aficionado? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-05 18:43 +0100
Re: The True Aficionado? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-06 11:34 -0800
Re: The True Aficionado? Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-03-07 16:24 -0600
Re: The True Aficionado? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 03:45 +1100
Re: The True Aficionado? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-03-03 16:01 -0600
Re: The True Aficionado? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-20 20:59 -0800
Re: The True Aficionado? mentificium@gmail.com - 2016-02-20 23:14 -0800
Re: The True Aficionado? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-21 16:33 +0100
Re: The True Aficionado? "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 03:19 +1100
Re: The True Aficionado? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-21 08:56 -0800
Re: The True Aficionado? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-02-21 12:22 -0600
Re: The True Aficionado? "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 07:50 +1100
Re: The True Aficionado? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-21 22:49 -0800
Re: The True Aficionado? "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 19:32 +1100
Re: The True Aficionado? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-22 09:23 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-22 17:17 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-02-22 11:30 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 07:38 +1100
csiph-web