1. a.i
- Posted by dubetyrant at hotmail.com Nov 22, 2002
- 2265 views
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C29249.EA10E980
charset="iso-8859-1"
Hey all,
=20
Pattern recognition, cant be considered,in any way
conducive to reasoning in a computer program.This
cbr is really just at the most a simulation or an emulation.
While sometimes it seems like a real intelligent person,
it can no way be construed to be intelligent. While it
takes a very different approach,its no less an emulation than
video game AI .
I agree with the thought of a project geared towards human
interaction,like a chatterbot but completely different in premiss,
completely different.So many people running around making
their own chatbots with a continuously modified cbr approach.Its =
stupid...as long as a computer program sees
a group of words as a string,all youve got is a database.It
has to see words from the user the same way it sees numbers or euphoria =
commands.User input has to be=20
something the computer can add,multiply,stretch or=20
otherwise manipulate.Data stored into a computer's ram
has no meaning for it,we have to find a viable way to make
it process words.
Im beginning to see what its going to take to make it
come alive...I hope you are too.
-Have a happy day-
JDUBE
------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C29249.EA10E980
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.3315.2870" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Hey all,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> Pattern recognition, cant be =
considered,in=20
any way</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>conducive to reasoning in a computer=20
program.This</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>cbr is really just at the most a =
simulation or an=20
emulation.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>While sometimes it seems like a real =
intelligent=20
person,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>it can no way be construed to be =
intelligent. While=20
it</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>takes a very different approach,its no =
less an=20
emulation than</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>video game AI .</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> I agree with the thought of a =
project geared=20
towards human</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>interaction,like a chatterbot but =
completely=20
different in premiss,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>completely different.So many people =
running around=20
making</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>their own chatbots with a continuously =
modified cbr=20
approach.Its stupid...as long as a computer program sees</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>a group of words as a string,all youve =
got is a=20
database.It</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>has to see words from the user the same =
way it sees=20
numbers or euphoria commands.User input has to be </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>something the computer can =
add,multiply,stretch or=20
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>otherwise manipulate.Data stored into a =
computer's=20
ram</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>has no meaning for it,we have to find a =
viable way=20
to make</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>it process words.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> Im beginning to see what its =
going to take=20
to make it</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>come alive...I hope you are =
too.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>-Have a happy day-</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2> &nbs=
p;  =
; =
=20
------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C29249.EA10E980--
2. Re: a.i
- Posted by "C. K. Lester" <cklester at yahoo.com> Nov 22, 2002
- 2251 views
> Im beginning to see what its going to take to make it > come alive...I hope you are too. Yes, far greater hardware than we've got at the moment... ;) If you liken the human brain to the hardware, and our experience as the software, and our instinct as the BIOS (?), then you'll begin to grasp how impossible it is to create a HUMAN AI at the moment. That's why I figure worms would be easier, though not easy. But first we have to determine if worms are even smart. What is your criteria for intelligence? There is a great distinction between "life" and "intelligent life."
3. Re: a.i
- Posted by Derek Parnell <ddparnell at bigpond.com> Nov 22, 2002
- 2236 views
Intelligence might have something to do with predicting the future based on what we know now. ---------------- cheers, Derek Parnell ----- Original Message ----- From: "C. K. Lester" <cklester at yahoo.com> To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com> Subject: Re: a.i > > > Im beginning to see what its going to take to make it > > come alive...I hope you are too. > > Yes, far greater hardware than we've got at the moment... ;) > > If you liken the human brain to the hardware, and our experience as the > software, and our instinct as the BIOS (?), then you'll begin to grasp how > impossible it is to create a HUMAN AI at the moment. > > That's why I figure worms would be easier, though not easy. But first we > have to determine if worms are even smart. What is your criteria for > intelligence? > > There is a great distinction between "life" and "intelligent life." > > > >
4. Re: a.i
- Posted by "C. K. Lester" <cklester at yahoo.com> Nov 22, 2002
- 2239 views
> Intelligence might have something to do with predicting the future based on > what we know now. To what extent, then? A worm can "predict" that it will die if it doesn't eat, so it scrounges for food. (I know it's acting on instinct (or is it?), but we need more concrete, less ambiguous evidence for intelligence.) I was going to suggest "survival" as an indicator of intelligence, but it's too general and easily emulated by non-intelligent entities... like plants. :)
5. Re: a.i
- Posted by "C. K. Lester" <cklester at yahoo.com> Nov 22, 2002
- 2248 views
> > Intelligence might have something to do with predicting the future based > on > > what we know now. > > To what extent, then? A worm can "predict" that it will die if it doesn't > eat, so it scrounges for food. (I know it's acting on instinct (or is it?), > but we need more concrete, less ambiguous evidence for intelligence.) I was > going to suggest "survival" as an indicator of intelligence, but it's too > general and easily emulated by non-intelligent entities... like plants. :) Oops! Maybe plants are intelligent, though. No offense to any EUPHORIA-programming plants out there.
6. Re: a.i
- Posted by dubetyrant at hotmail.com Nov 22, 2002
- 2262 views
>
>If you liken the human brain to the hardware, and our experience as the
>software, and our instinct as the BIOS (?), then you'll begin to grasp how
>impossible it is to create a HUMAN AI at the moment.
Negative.Simply put,look at Euphoria,ok?The interpreter understands
a series of commands,a limited set of words generally refered to as
a HIGH LEVEL PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE,the very word "interpreter" itself
points to changing our words to something the computer understands.
What Im thinking of is a VERY HIGH LEVEL language,with maybe thousands
of words,(average person has what?60000 words in vocabulary?We start
with the vocabulary of,say your average 3 year old).But not
just a programming language,thats not the point,but use the technology
of a computer lnguage's interpreter so that the program can understand what
we say.You also use this very high level language to program all
your instincts,or you could just use euphoria.Do you see what I mean?
And what do you think of the idea,would it work?
--"Imagination is more important than
knowledge"--Albert Einstein
-JDUBE
>
>
7. Re: a.i
- Posted by "C. K. Lester" <cklester at yahoo.com> Nov 22, 2002
- 2234 views
> >If you liken the human brain to the hardware, and our experience as the > >software, and our instinct as the BIOS (?), then you'll begin to grasp how > >impossible it is to create a HUMAN AI at the moment. > > Negative.Simply put,look at Euphoria,ok?The interpreter understands > a series of commands,a limited set of words generally refered to as > a HIGH LEVEL PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE,the very word "interpreter" itself > points to changing our words to something the computer understands. You cannot liken the human intelligence to a programming language, not even a high one. > What Im thinking of is a VERY HIGH LEVEL language,with maybe thousands > of words,(average person has what?60000 words in vocabulary?We start > with the vocabulary of,say your average 3 year old).But not > just a programming language,thats not the point,but use the technology > of a computer lnguage's interpreter so that the program can understand what > we say. The problem is, the human intelligence has 5 modes of input: vision, sound, touch, taste, and smell. WITHOUT THESE, any "intelligent" creature will not be able to "understand what we say." It's that simple. Intelligence is experiential... it has to be because it is so complex. > You also use this very high level language to program all > your instincts,or you could just use euphoria.Do you see what I mean? > And what do you think of the idea,would it work? It's an approach I'd not heard before... but you'd have to give it sensory input and then use EUPHORIA to develop the instinct programming to utilize that input.
8. Re: a.i
- Posted by Irv Mullins <irv at take.maxleft.com> Nov 22, 2002
- 2243 views
> Negative.Simply put,look at Euphoria,ok?The interpreter understands > a series of commands,a limited set of words generally refered to as > a HIGH LEVEL PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE,the very word "interpreter" itself > points to changing our words to something the computer understands. > What Im thinking of is a VERY HIGH LEVEL language,with maybe thousands > of words,(average person has what?60000 words in vocabulary?We start > with the vocabulary of,say your average 3 year old).But not > just a programming language,thats not the point,but use the technology > of a computer lnguage's interpreter so that the program can understand what > we say.You also use this very high level language to program all > your instincts,or you could just use euphoria.Do you see what I mean? No, from here I can't see anything but a computer screen :) Until you find a way to implement a 'context handler', ai isn't going to work. And the fewer the words available, the more context-dependent intelligence becomes. A baby can interact reasonably well with "gimme" and "NO!", but these only work because the context is understood by both the baby and others. Regards, Irv
9. Re: a.i
- Posted by dubetyrant at hotmail.com Nov 22, 2002
- 2245 views
>From: Irv Mullins <irv at take.maxleft.com> >Subject: Re: a.i > > > > Negative.Simply put,look at Euphoria,ok?The interpreter understands > > a series of commands,a limited set of words generally refered to as > > a HIGH LEVEL PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE,the very word "interpreter" itself > > points to changing our words to something the computer understands. > > What Im thinking of is a VERY HIGH LEVEL language,with maybe thousands > > of words,(average person has what?60000 words in vocabulary?We start > > with the vocabulary of,say your average 3 year old).But not > > just a programming language,thats not the point,but use the technology > > of a computer lnguage's interpreter so that the program can understand >what > > we say.You also use this very high level language to program all > > your instincts,or you could just use euphoria.Do you see what I mean? > >No, from here I can't see anything but a computer screen :) > >Until you find a way to implement a 'context handler', ai isn't going to >work. And the fewer the words available, the more context-dependent >intelligence becomes. A baby can interact reasonably well with "gimme" and >"NO!", but these only work because the context is understood by both the >baby >and others. > >Regards, >Irv > Well congratulations!Welocome to the node-based architecture of a neural network.Words in context are memorized patterns stored as neural nets or "thoughts".The only difference is that the data stored is not a "string",its a related series of "words",that all have an active meaning to the ai because they are a part of "language". >==^^=============================================================== >This email was sent to: dubetyrant at hotmail.com > >
10. Re: a.i
- Posted by Rom <kjehas at frisurf.no> Nov 23, 2002
- 2242 views
From: "Kat" <kat at kogeijin.com>
> .....
> Would the Ai know who these nicks are, normally, given only the
> intelligence i those lines? This is an example of why you haveto build =
in methods of
> determining data, what it means, and instanciating new methods to =
manipulate the data.=20
> Some things no one can predict, and these events > raise errors at the =
worst times.=20
Very true.=20
If you mean that uninstanciated vars will raise logical errors ... very =
true.
You are appraching what essensially is a design flaw in modern computer =
languages, including Euphoria. While it may be too late to do anything =
about the design flaws in C, it is maybe not too late to correct the =
design flaw i Euphoria. I am afraid this design flaw has to corrected =
before Euphoria can truely be usable for formulating logic.
The design flaw in Euphoria is the same as expressed in this pascal =
documentation:
"A Boolean variable can assume the ordinal values 0 and 1 only, but =
variables of type ByteBool, WordBool, and LongBool can assume other =
ordinal values. An expression of type ByteBool, WordBool, or LongBool is =
considered False when its ordinal value is zero, and True when its =
ordinal value is nonzero. Whenever a ByteBool, WordBool, or LongBool =
value is used in a context where a Boolean value is expected, the =
compiler will automatically generate code that converts any nonzero =
value to the value True."
This is NOT correct boolean logic. Neither Pascal nor Euphoria can =
handle uninstanciated vars correctly. "a > 1" is such a structure that =
implicitly uses a boolean var that cannot always be resolved, that means =
the value of the var is undecidable. Then the result is neither true not =
false! But Pascal and Euphoria will not catch that result.
So the control structure should have been like this:
if a > 1 then .... -- a > 1 is true
ifnot then .... -- a > 1 is false
ifnil then ... -- a > 1 is undecidable
The truth table is like this:
(a > 1) result
true -> true
false -> false
a is uninstanciated -> nil
Rom
11. Re: a.i
- Posted by Pete Lomax <petelomax at blueyonder.co.uk> Nov 23, 2002
- 2235 views
On Sat, 23 Nov 2002 09:49:26 +0100, Rom <kjehas at frisurf.no> wrote: > Neither Pascal nor Euphoria can handle uninstanciated vars correctly. All you need is this: object a integer ablank ablank=3D1 Then anywhere a is modified: ... a=3D<something> ablank=3D0 ... Then if the above has or has not been called: if ablank then undecideable elsif a > 1 then true else false end if
12. Re: a.i
- Posted by David Cuny <dcuny at LANSET.COM> Nov 23, 2002
- 2243 views
rom wrote: > This is NOT correct boolean logic. Neither Pascal nor Euphoria can hand= le > uninstanciated vars correctly. "a > 1" is such a structure that > implicitly uses a boolean var that cannot always be resolved, that mean= s > the value of the var is undecidable. Then the result is neither true no= t > false! But Pascal and Euphoria will not catch that result. I'm not following what you mean here. If you attempt to read from an=20 uninstaciated (declared but value undefined) variable in Euphoria, you WI= LL=20 get a runtime error. -- David Cuny
13. Re: a.i
- Posted by Rom <kjehas at frisurf.no> Nov 23, 2002
- 2222 views
From: "Pete Lomax" <petelomax at blueyonder.co.uk>
> All you need is this: ...
All I need to do when I want this:
integer a, b, c, d, e
a =3D 2
b =3D 5
c =3D 10 =20
e =3D (a + b) / (c + d)
=20
if assigned( e) then print( 1, e)
end if
.... is to write this:
=20
integer a, b, c, d, e
integer ablank, bblank, cblank, dblank, eblank
ablank =3D 1 =20
bblank =3D 1 =20
cblank =3D 1 =20
dblank =3D 1 =20
eblank =3D 1 =20
a =3D 2
ablank =3D 0 =20
b =3D 5
bblank =3D 0 =20
c =3D 10
cblank =3D 0 =20
if ablank =3D 0 and bblank =3D 0 and cblank =3D 0 and
dblank =3D 0 and c !=3D 0 and e !=3D 0 then=20
e =3D (a + b) /(c + d)
eblank =3D 0
end if
if eblank =3D 0 then print( 1, e)=20
end if
.... because that is how Euphoria and Pascal++ works.
Then what is:
if (a > 1) or (b > 1) or (d > 1)...?
when d is not assigned?
Rom
14. Re: a.i
- Posted by Rom <kjehas at frisurf.no> Nov 23, 2002
- 2251 views
From: "David Cuny" <dcuny at LANSET.COM> > I'm not following what you mean here. If you attempt to read from an=20 > uninstaciated (declared but value undefined) variable in Euphoria, you = WILL=20 > get a runtime error. You are right. What I said is true for C/C++/Delphi, but Euphoria will = at least force you to instanciate all vars to something to get program = to run. I a practical application the instanciation can be values from all kind = of sources, and Euphoria has not defined "nil" (uninstanciated as a = flag) so you cannot simple test if assigned( <var>).... If a var is not properly assigned during execution then default value = will be used... Is that proper logic (when application actually do not know the value of = a var is...except that the programmer had to put some value into it)? = And of course you cannot uninstanciate a value, meaning that the value = is rubbish/nil (you must declare a flag for each var and add a lot of = code). Rom
15. Re: a.i
- Posted by Irv Mullins <irv at take.maxleft.com> Nov 23, 2002
- 2220 views
On Friday 22 November 2002 06:37 pm, you wrote: > Well congratulations!Welocome to the node-based architecture of a neural > network.Words in context are memorized patterns stored as neural > nets or "thoughts".The only difference is that the data stored is > not a "string",its a related series of "words",that all have an > active meaning to the ai because they are a part of "language". ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "By the year ______ (1) computers will exhibit the intelligence of a ______________ (2) !" Instructions: 1) Fill in any year between 1854 and 2600. 2) Enter the name of any animal, vegetable, or mineral. 3) Add your prediction to those made by AI researchers since the time of Charles Babbage. 4) Repeat as needed (that's what they have been doing). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. Re: a.i
- Posted by dubetyrant at hotmail.com Nov 23, 2002
- 2239 views
>From: Irv Mullins <irv at take.maxleft.com>
>Subject: Re: a.i
>
>
>On Friday 22 November 2002 06:37 pm, you wrote:
>
> > Well congratulations!Welocome to the node-based architecture of a neural
> > network.Words in context are memorized patterns stored as neural
> > nets or "thoughts".The only difference is that the data stored is
> > not a "string",its a related series of "words",that all have an
> > active meaning to the ai because they are a part of "language".
>
>
>"By the year 1954 (1) computers will exhibit the intelligence of
>a _____IRV_________ (2) !"(couldnt resist)
>
>Instructions:
>1) Fill in any year between 1854 and 2600.
>2) Enter the name of any animal, vegetable, or mineral.
>3) Add your prediction to those made by AI researchers since the time of
>Charles Babbage.
>4) Repeat as needed (that's what they have been doing).
Its not that I dont care what other researchers have done and what
they are doing now,on the contrary,I try to take what worked, from
a project and dispense with what didnt work.Eat the hay,spit out the
sticks.
YOURS TRULY
JDUBE
>==^^===============================================================
>This email was sent to: dubetyrant at hotmail.com
>
>
17. Re: a.i
- Posted by Kat <kat at kogeijin.com> Nov 23, 2002
- 2256 views
On 23 Nov 2002, at 9:49, Rom wrote: > > From: "Kat" <kat at kogeijin.com> > > > ..... > > Would the Ai know who these nicks are, normally, given only the > > intelligence i those lines? This is an example of why you haveto build in > > methods of determining data, what it means, and instanciating new methods to > > manipulate the data. > > > Some things no one can predict, and these events > raise errors at the worst > > times. > > Very true. > If you mean that uninstanciated vars will raise logical errors ... very true. > > You are appraching what essensially is a design flaw in modern computer > languages, including Euphoria. While it may be too late to do anything about > the > design flaws in C, it is maybe not too late to correct the design flaw i > Euphoria. I am afraid this design flaw has to corrected before Euphoria can > truely be usable for formulating logic. Actually, i was talking about *code* , not *variables*. But Eu also can't natively deal with Eu code in a variable, and evaluate it. Kat
18. Re: a.i
- Posted by Irv Mullins <irv at take.maxleft.com> Nov 23, 2002
- 2229 views
On Saturday 23 November 2002 11:34 am, JDUBE wrote: > Its not that I dont care what other researchers have done and what > they are doing now,on the contrary,I try to take what worked, from > a project and dispense with what didnt work.Eat the hay,spit out the > sticks. That's always good advice (wish Rob would try that). The problem with ai is that there is so little that actually works. Irv
19. Re: a.i
- Posted by Kat <kat at kogeijin.com> Nov 23, 2002
- 2219 views
On 23 Nov 2002, at 13:28, Irv Mullins wrote: > > On Saturday 23 November 2002 11:34 am, JDUBE wrote: > > > Its not that I dont care what other researchers have done and what > > they are doing now,on the contrary,I try to take what worked, from > > a project and dispense with what didnt work.Eat the hay,spit out the > > sticks. > > That's always good advice (wish Rob would try that). > The problem with ai is that there is so little that actually works. There is so little that is publicised that works. If it works, it's proprietary and secret. If it doesn't, it's only there to make money or throw others off the real track. Kat
20. Re: a.i
- Posted by 1evan at sbcglobal.net Nov 23, 2002
- 2240 views
> > >Then what is: > > if (a > 1) or (b > 1) or (d > 1)...? > >when d is not assigned? > >Rom > > an error: d has not been declared
21. Re: a.i
- Posted by useless_ Jan 13, 2015
- 2277 views
Intelligence might have something to do with predicting the future based on what we know now.
To what extent, then? A worm can "predict" that it will die if it doesn't eat, so it scrounges for food. (I know it's acting on instinct (or is it?), but we need more concrete, less ambiguous evidence for intelligence.) I was going to suggest "survival" as an indicator of intelligence, but it's too general and easily emulated by non-intelligent entities... like plants. :)
Recently a worm's brain was dissected neuron by neuron, simulated in software, and applied to a robotic worm, mechanical bones, muscles, skin. The robot woke up and began acting like a worm, with zero behavioral programming. See:
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=worm+neuron+robot
useless
22. Re: a.i
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Jan 14, 2015
- 2239 views
Recently a worm's brain was dissected neuron by neuron, simulated in software, and applied to a robotic worm, mechanical bones, muscles, skin. The robot woke up and began acting like a worm, with zero behavioral programming.
Yes, they've sure made a lot of progress recently. Just a few years ago all they had were some scripts for the muscle model (https://github.com/openworm/muscle_model )
But now, ...
http://radar.oreilly.com/2014/11/the-robotic-worm.html
http://www.i-programmer.info/news/105-artificial-intelligence/7985-a-worms-mind-in-a-lego-body.html
I wonder how the synaptic weights were determined for this latest robot. I seem to remember the following criticism of this earlier work, P. Frenger, Simple C. elegans Nervous System Emulator, Houston Conf Biomed Engr Research, 2005, pg.192.
These early attempts of simulation have been criticized for not being biologically realistic. Although we have the complete structural connectome, we do not know the synaptic weights at each of the known synapses. We do not even know whether the synapses are inhibitory or excitatory. To compensate for this the Hiroshima group used machine learning to find the weights of the synapses which would generate the desired behaviour. It is therefore no surprise that the model displayed the behaviour, and it may not represent true understanding of the system.
23. Re: a.i
- Posted by Ekhnat0n Jan 14, 2015
- 2170 views
Suppose for a hypothesis a super-computer of the future COULD solve the total of all synapses and their relative weights.
What would the consequences be for a robot being provided with this info?
and
What woukd it mean for us humans IF such robot were to come alive in fact?
Gruesome thoughts are flashing through my mind and I for one would fight as hard
as I could to prevent this from happening because:
What if the indestructable robot would consider mankind to be inferior to him and eradicate US.
24. Re: a.i
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Jan 14, 2015
- 2172 views
Suppose for a hypothesis a super-computer of the future COULD solve the total of all synapses and their relative weights.
Supposition is unnecessary. For C. elegans, the weighting issue appears to have been solved.
What would the consequences be for a robot being provided with this info?
You mean, like, what happened in November?
What woukd it mean for us humans IF such robot were to come alive in fact?
Define alive. Define life.
Gruesome thoughts are flashing through my mind and I for one would fight as hard
as I could to prevent this from happening because:
What if the indestructable robot would consider mankind to be inferior to him and eradicate US.
Unless we've successfully uploaded an individual human being's connectome, I'd argue the resultant robot is more likely to be like Rain Man than Terminator.
25. Re: a.i
- Posted by Ekhnat0n Jan 14, 2015
- 2133 views
Come on Jim, don't be a nit-picker as you got my drift clearly.
I know nothing about November as I was fully taken by the realisation of my plan.
That is.. helping ppl as my wife asked in the last weeks of her life
and
deciding on the way to do just that.
As for the definition of life, you mean conscious life I suppose
and as far as I am concerned, that will be found in a story I wrote years ago.
You can find it on my site buscadero.nl and it is called Three tubes of paint
26. Re: a.i
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Jan 14, 2015
- 2128 views
Come on Jim, don't be a nit-picker as you got my drift clearly.
Right, I was picking on two points.
First, you seem to be speculating on future technology and its consequences .. but I pointed out that this technology was already here today.
Second, I thought the "machines take over the world" theme was a bit silly.
As for the definition of life, you mean conscious life I suppose
No, I don't. Artificial life, aritificail consciousness, and artificial intelligence are all separate things.
27. Re: a.i
- Posted by useless_ Jan 14, 2015
- 2117 views
No, I don't. Artificial life, aritificail consciousness, and artificial intelligence are all separate things.
To be fair, Colossus didn't seem alive, but did intelligently demonstrate one unforeseen way to stop war. It was obviously self-aware, which strongly implies consciousness.
I read the paperback ~1969, but didn't find the movie until it was on Ebay a couple years ago. Still too much killing. Time for a modern remake.
I'd say it's time to program a better Colossus in Euphoria, call it Euphorious <cough>, to be more intelligent and run on modern hardware, but since Euphoria cannot "learn" new procedures during runtime (string execution), that's not possible. Yes, i have had that on my mind 45 years now. Every time i need that string eval function, i must formulate it in a different language and export it to a new environment where it loses context. Even when still in a Euphoria context (an application's environment), it's sometimes difficult to know what it is that the Eu app doesn't know. Until Jiri and DCuny enlightened me on associated lists ~1999, i couldn't "ask" the value of George.owns.cow.#12.color unless it was already defined and initialised, even before the program knew George possessed any cows (altho i can ask that on a C64 without crashing). And then something so simple as knowing that varname existed could derive to knowing cows can be owned by George, or that brown can be on the surface of cows. The Eu sequence can be a very powerful thing, but Eu needs improvements of the sort it could not do in 1999, and still cannot do.
useless
28. Re: a.i
- Posted by Ekhnat0n Jan 14, 2015
- 2117 views
hey useless,
it seems we are about the same age, considering you have a thing
on your mind for 45 years, I guess you will be approaching 65
or even be older, like me.(I'm 69 since dec 9th last year)
Come on man, you nor anyone else ever is useless, so shed that name 
Every last little contribution can make the difference between failure and success
and you have contributed quite a bit over the years I guess.
So thanks for your modesty, like you I like to work from the limelight
because I hate to stand out.
Let us join forces and make the difference ONCE and for all
29. Re: a.i
- Posted by useless_ Jan 15, 2015
- 2043 views
Looks like my posts are still being removed. I didn't misrepresent anything, i didn't attack anyone. Of what use was responding to Ekhnat0n? None, it was
useless
30. Re: a.i
- Posted by Ekhnat0n Jan 28, 2015
- 1985 views
@useless
(might it be you were known on the IRC-channel of Euphoria by the name of Kat long ago???
And if so.... how is Tiggr??
And how is House now?? Is it ready??
Where for the sake of the Mother can I contact you?)
dear utterly USEFUL college-euphorian,
no-one can hinder you in contacting me personaly at nyellorion@live.nl or for that matter ekhnaton@live.nl.
Please do so if you like and just you and me will show what can be achieved by real cooperation.
Ekhnat0n
He who erases or blocks this message does do great harm to the
development of Euphoria imho/
And that damage will be even be almost beyond repair if useless IS Gertie, because SHE is the very woman we really NEED
31. Re: a.i
- Posted by katsmeow Jan 28, 2015
- 1985 views
That is indeed me, Ekhnat0n. I sent you an email, so we may have a less-filtered conversation.
I think OE isn't ever going to be the platform we hoped Euphoria would be over 10 years ago. It's nice to see DCuny back with his gentle nagging requests, and to see Ryan has developed an app that is pushing at the needs for real core improvements. But there is a jump between what is and what could be, and pushing people across that jump isn't going to happen.
Kat
32. Re: a.i
- Posted by Ekhnat0n Jan 28, 2015
- 1990 views
That is indeed me, Ekhnat0n.
Kat
Dear Kat, I replied to your personal email already as you might already have found out by now
