I feel that I understand what Mike is talking about, but Mike does not believe that. So after a few years of this I have to wonder why not and the only reasons that I can come up with is that Mike does not have the psychological ability to accept that I might have thought about things like that before he did. There is no other good explanation.
Let me say that I think that my reasoning about using the acquisition of a few context-free grammars to bootstrap the acquisition of a few context-sensitive grammars is an amazing idea. So how come no one else really gets it? The issue is not that no one had ever thought of anything like it before, but that I can see how the details could, when combined with the ideas about a text-based AI/AGI program that I have thinking about for some time, be implemented in a way that can actually work. So it is not just the one idea that is unique, it is that I have a highly developed plan that I should be able to start testing early in 2014 to actually test this idea out. That is what is completely missing in your minds from my account of the significance of the acquisition of grammars. So even though I am repeatedly talking about "grammars" instead of "grammar" or "language" the significance of this will go right by you, maybe forever. Now if my program actually works then some of you would actually become interested in what I have been trying to say. If it does not work then you will knowingly know that you didn't waste your time trying to understand that there may be something in the details that you missed. On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 7:45 PM, Piaget Modeler <[email protected]>wrote: > Constructionist viewpoint: > > Is it the case that this distinction between pattern and patchwork only > exists in Mike T.'s mind, > because he has constructed this concept himself (ergo, defined it for > hemself) ? Has he socialized > this concept to others, or was it socialized to him long ago from > someone else who originally constructed > the concept some time ago? > > Either originated or socialized, this idea of pattern and patchwork has > been reconstructed in Mike T's mind > as a very specific thing. The real question is how successful he is in > socializing this idea to other AGI-ers. > > Some may see pattern and patchwork as the same, some may see patchwork > as a subset of pattern, or vice versa. > > But this is all mental, not real. The real thing out in the universe, > whether a magazine cover, or bed of flowers, > or ocean waves has no name. It is just that we, communicating to one > another have assigned the name > pattern or patchwork to it and defined it for ourselves. > > Do I know what you taste when you taste a lemon? Do I know what you > mean when you say a patchwork? > For me it all depends on my pre-existing mental model. Just as for you > everything depends on your own > pre-existing mental model. > > To say that others may never "get" what he's saying is probably quite > accurate indeed, but for different reasons > than Mike T. thinks. > > ~PM > > ------------------------------ > Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2013 00:15:20 +0000 > Subject: [agi] The *legal" difference between patchwork and pattern > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > > What follows is the difference between not merely patchwork and pattern, > but AGI and narrow AI. > > Getting AGI-ers to see that difference is a Herculean task - but looking > at that difference in the light of the law may do it. > > Look at the two mag. covers in > > > http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110222/12002913212/is-copying-idea-magazine-cover-infringement.shtml > > They are obviously very close. AGI-ers would be tempted in other > circumstances to see them as following a common pattern/formula. > > But if they were, the Russian mag would have no defence in law against the > charge of plagiarism. > > Actually they are members of a collection of patchworks, and the Russian > mag, does have a defence, (although it might still lose in some courts). > > Quite obviously, as the comments in the article make clear, there are many > differences in the parts of the two covers/patchworks. > > And that's one of several differences between patterns and patchworks. > > Examples of a pattern share the SAME set of parts, while examples of a > patchwork have EVERNEW and different, EVERCHANGING parts. > > An example of a pattern can only have ONE specific part/form at any given > point, while a patchwork can have any of an INFINITY of diverse parts.forms > at any given point. (That may be too subtle a difference for many AGI-ers > to grasp - only one part vs an infinity of parts). The Russian mag, for > example, has "substituted" a cock for a flower at the centre, but it could > also have used a snake, bear, ball, plate etc... ad infinitum > > Patterns have RULES, patchworks have NO RULES. > > And then there's the v. different generative principles of > patchworks/patterns. > > The Russian mag/patchwork clearly hasn't copied a *FORMULA*/algo, (even > though AGI-ers believe that everything is generated by formulae/algos.) > > What the law and our wider culture tell us is that the mags/patchworks > copy an IDEA . (You could also call it copying a *concept*). And ideas can > have infinitely diverse "expressions"/forms. > > AGI is not about rigid formulae or algos that can only generate a specific > very limited set of patterns,but ideas that can generate a very general, > unlimited and infinite diversity of patchworks. Think of how the idea/ > concept of *chair* can generate an infinite diversity of chair forms. Or > how GO TO THE KITCHEN can generate an infinite diversity of journeys/routes > to kitchens. > > What more precisely is the difference between idea and formula/algo? > ANother time. But you should be able to start at least to see the > difference. > *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/19999924-4a978ccc> | > Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription > <http://www.listbox.com> > *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/24379807-f5817f28> | > Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription > <http://www.listbox.com> > -- Jim Bromer ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
