I think the problem is that we don't know what the topic actually is. I've read your posts a couple of times and I'm having trouble following what it is you're wanting to discuss. Maybe you could post a brief statement about what it is you're asking or telling us here, in order to help remove the confusion?

Quote:

Original post by PlayStationX is this private blog or public forum? i thought moderators are supposed to moderate trolling and off topic blabbering, no?

The moderators are also supposed to close threads of complete nonsense. Careful what you wish for.

Quote:

Original post by PlayStationX 1st: any system with 'B', i.e. memory(input), is flexible system, it has evolutionary potential

Memory does not make a system more flexible, especially if that system is a human being. Memory is the basis for assumption building, and decisions are made based on past memories. Memories shape and alter our perception of the world. So, I find it hard to agree that memory facilitates a flexible system. It seems to be quite the opposite. You forget that humans are not rational beings and that the human mind is great as finding a path from point A to point B even if it means the path passes through preconceived notions, assumptions about the problem, personal biases, or even external influence. Memories define who we are while binding us at the same time.

Quote:

The first point is to show how "life" and mental processes are not something to be measured in boolean with yes/no, but rather with floating point or percentage.

I think most AI people agree with this by now, even most common people.

Quote:

The second point is to define all of the following in the terms of information technology and above virtual definition using concepts of information: input<->memory<->output->reaction: cognition consciousness perception reflex detection emotion feeling thought instinct anticipation decision acknowledgment knowledge willingness comprehension intelligence awareness intuition recognition intention sensation mind self-awareness

Sounds like a definition for an intelligent agent.

Quote:

The third point is about Turnig machines, determinism, quantum uncertainty, algorithmic predictability, "free will" or "active will", possibility of simulation of self-awareness and about practical means to measure it. The bonus point is to define and try to answer the concepts of anticipation, intuition, prediction and prophecy.

Ah, the eternal argument of free will. Personally, I believe there was never free will in the first place, just the illusion that there is and was. The outcome of a coin flip can be determined if all variables involved are known. The outcome of "flipping" a human can also be predicted if all variables involved are known. It is pretty much the basis for most magic tricks and mind tricks.

I think that the subject is interesting but you better post it somewhere else, since most people here don't seem interested lol

Quote:

Original post by WeirdoFu Ah, the eternal argument of free will. Personally, I believe there was never free will in the first place, just the illusion that there is and was. The outcome of a coin flip can be determined if all variables involved are known. The outcome of "flipping" a human can also be predicted if all variables involved are known. It is pretty much the basis for most magic tricks and mind tricks.

Somebody watch last Friday's episode of NUMB3RS.

==========================================
Mirror test
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The mirror test is a measure of self-awareness developed by Gordon Gallup Jr. in 1970, that was based in part on observations made by Charles Darwin. Gordon Gallup built on these observations by devising a test that attempts to gauge self-awareness by determining whether an animal can recognize its own reflection in a mirror as an image of itself. This is accomplished by surreptitiously marking the animal with two odourless dye spots. The test spot is on a part of the animal that would be visible in front of a mirror, while the control spot is in an accessible but hidden part of the animal's body. Scientists observe whether the animal reacts in a manner consistent with it being aware that the test dye is located on its own body while ignoring the control dye. Such behaviour might include turning and adjusting of the body in order to better view the marking in the mirror, or poking at the marking on its own body with a limb while viewing the mirror.

Animals that have passed the mirror test are all of the great apes (bonobos, chimpanzees, orangutans, gorillas, and humans), bottlenose dolphins, Orcas, elephants, and European Magpies. Pigeons though could only detect the spots on their own body after they had been trained to and untrained pigeons have never been able to pass the mirror test. Humans tend to fail the mirror test until they are about 18 months old, or the "mirror stage". Dogs, cats, and young human children all fail the mirror test.
==========================================



WeirdoFu,


hi there, we seem to agree pretty much, so i'll just try to clear what i think is not in agreement.

Quote:

Memory does not make a system more flexible, especially if that system is a human being.

i say it does, since flexibility = memory. my definition is more general, i mean, not only physical/external, but also mental/internal flexibility. human without enough memory/flexibility can not store information, can not learn. it could be physically flexible, but without memory it would still be intellectually or mentally/internally inflexible. these terms are almost synonyms, as in "stupid as brick" vs "smart as sponge".


- "flexibility is function moving parts and their degrees of freedom"

flexibility or ability to be modified, is ability to receive or hold information, e.g. brick VS. spring, dry sand VS wet sand. 1 bit of computer memory has one "moving part" and two degree of freedom, not very flexible, while byte has 8 moving parts, therefore it's more flexible and it automatically can store more information. 8 grains of sand can store more information than 8 computer bits, because they have more degrees, even up to infinite degrees of freedom. as a system 10 grains of sand are more flexible than 4 grains, and this is proportional to information volatility, sensitivity and maximum memory capacity.



- example -
memory can be exactly like a computer memory, but the definition is more general, so in the case of, say bacteria, memory is simply described by the change/evolution or state of internal complexity. eating something for bacteria is equivalent of "learning" about it.

for bacteria to be self-aware it would need to "eat" itself, it simply lacks 'memory storage', flexibility or structure complexity to describe itself inside itself anyhow else. however, when it divides, at that very moment it actually "reflects" on itself by making a copy of itself, and for the brief time we could say it exhibits some kind of pseudo-self-awareness.

Quote:

Ah, the eternal argument of free will. Personally, I believe there was never free will in the first place, just the illusion that there is and was. The outcome of a coin flip can be determined if all variables involved are known. The outcome of "flipping" a human can also be predicted if all variables involved are known. It is pretty much the basis for most magic tricks and mind tricks.

many speak of "mind" is to chemical interaction in the brain as what "heat" is to kinetic energy, i.e. velocities and masses of particles in the system. "heat" is dynamics, "mind" is interaction, and the abstraction of these concepts in relation to artificial simulation therefore simply fails to separate the concept from the context of infinite divisibility of time and space. infinity and simultaneity are the origin of indeterminacy, this is the only place where the "free will" may come from, in the true meaning of it, as "active will".

how do we *measure* "consciousness"? how do you read "information" within? how do you read the mind or memory? whether artificial or biological creature, do you measure some numerical output of "neural network" or measure the "heat", some temperature or fluid/electron dynamics _around integrated circuits/neurons? the point is, humans can not distinguish between intelligence and anything else, whatever measurements, tests and practical conclusions we try to make, all will be seen, understood and measured according to logic and therefore intelligence, not free will or consciousness.


unfortunately, intelligence is the least identifiable of human attributes, it can be most easily faked. it can be learned, it can be programmed, it can even be trained. we can train neural networks from empty brain, from "tabula raza" to thinking brain and intelligent chess or backgammon player, example: http://www.jellyfish-backgammon.com/ ...you can even train pigeons to recognize their reflection in the mirror, pass the "mirror test" for self awareness that even cats, dogs and young humans fail. can self-consciousness therefore be trained? the answer is yes. the problem is, this is still not about free will, but about intelligence, again.

humans simply lack the understanding of "fuzzy logic", they can't judge randomness, can not qualify or quantify it. but this is what "humanity" is all about, it is opposite of "intelligence". intelligence is predictable, it can be faked, it is about determinism and algorithmic inevitability. on the other hand, indeterminism is the main characteristic and what drives human emotions, key attribute to spontaneous behavior such as artistic, crazy, humorous, inventive, passionate, creative... the only possible source of "active will", or 'The Force'.

Posting pseudo-science philosophy in a programming forum is an interesting exercise in futility.

There is zero scientific basis behind anything you post. It's a mess of garbled metaphors and meaningless semantic diatribes. The only thing you've done is string a bunch of words together to demonstrate that you don't have any understanding of psychology, neuroscience or programming.

I award you zero points and may god have mercy on your soul.

-me

It is possible that this is being written with one of those stupid auto-generators that puts together bits and pieces of other tech documents. Dunno.

Either way, it's childish crap.

Quote:

Original post by PlayStationX Quote: Memory does not make a system more flexible, especially if that system is a human being. i say it does, since flexibility = memory

My head just exploded.

Palidine,

Quote:

Posting pseudo-science philosophy in a programming forum is an interesting exercise in futility. There is zero scientific basis behind anything you post.

i'm sorry for your failure to understand. but, you did not argument your utterly nonsensical opinion, so i have no idea what were you talking about.


what exactly did you fail to grasp?

please be specific and point the part that confused you, so i can explain.



however, don't expect to understand much of this if you're under 14 and have no knowledge of information technology... anyway, thanks for expressing you boredom, vanity, hate and ignorance, it's amusing as ever.