I originally thought about novel computational rules. Arithmetic is not reversible because a computational result is not unique for the input operands. That makes it a type of compression. Furthermore it uses a limited set of rules. That makes it a super compression method.
On Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 12:08 PM Jim Bromer <jimbro...@gmail.com> wrote: > I guess I understand what you mean. > > On Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 12:07 PM Jim Bromer <jimbro...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I think your use of metaphors, especially metaphors that were intended to >> emphasize your thoughts through exaggeration, may have confused me. Would >> you explain your last post Steve? >> >> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 12:02 PM Steve Richfield <steve.richfi...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Too much responding without sufficient thought. After a week of thought >>> regarding earlier postings on this thread... >>> >>> Genuine computation involves manipulating numerically expressible value >>> (e.g. 0.62), dimensionality (e.g. probability), and significance (e.g. +/- >>> 0.1). Outputs of biological neurons appear to fit this model. >>> >>> HOWEVER, much of AI does NOT fit this model - yet still appears to >>> "work". If this is useful than use it, but there usually is no path to >>> better solutions. You can't directly understand, optimize, adapt, debug, >>> etc., because it is difficult/impossible to wrap your brain around >>> quantities representing nothing. >>> >>> Manipulations that don't fit this model are numerology, not mathematics, >>> akin to bring astrology instead of astronomy. >>> >>> It seems perfectly obvious to me that AGI, when it comes into being, >>> will involve NO numerological faux "computation". >>> >>> Sure, learning could involve developing entirely new computation, but it >>> would have to perform potentially valid computations on it's inputs. For >>> example, adding probabilities is NOT valid, but ORing them could be valid. >>> >>> Steve >>> >>> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 8:22 AM Alan Grimes via AGI <agi@agi.topicbox.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> It has the basic structure and organization of a conscious agent, >>>> obviously it lacks the other ingredients required to produce a complete >>>> mind. >>>> >>>> Stefan Reich via AGI wrote: >>>> > Prednet develops consciousness? >>>> > >>>> > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019, 06:51 Alan Grimes via AGI <agi@agi.topicbox.com >>>> > <mailto:agi@agi.topicbox.com>> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > Yay, it seems peeps are finally ready to talk about this!! =P >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Lets see if I can fool anyone into thinking I'm actually making >>>> > sense by >>>> > starting with a first principles approach... Permalink >>>> > < >>>> https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T395236743964cb4b-M686d9fcf7662ad8dc2fc1130 >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Please report bounces from this address to a...@numentics.com >>>> >>>> Powers are not rights. >>>> >>> *Artificial General Intelligence List <https://agi.topicbox.com/latest>* >>> / AGI / see discussions <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi> + >>> participants <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/members> + delivery >>> options <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription> Permalink >>> <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T395236743964cb4b-M3683e7beda9dccf33144d7fc> >>> ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T395236743964cb4b-M576a973586d534a5910e3ee9 Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
