Forget about Tintner, consider his mosquito-like emissions of maths and algo's diatribe squelched. Us AGI'ers can only take so much sweet sounding evasive baselessness. His fancy footwork of dancing on top of ...more words dancing on top of... endless happy haplessness.
While he did display complexity of thought and articulation he couldn't overcome some strategically junctured mental knots. We all have them but we attempt to minimize the burden on others when recognized. His burden became ours and was getting amplified for no reason. Numerous attempts were made to point out and assist with his disability but to no avail. Much effort was wasted with little gained. The whole world can't wait until Tintners's figured it out. This list isn't about "Waiting for Tintner" and projecting out his slice of the multiversal patchwork of gleeful jibberishal non-computishness into our perception. Bye Mike I'm sure you'll find another home to voice your opinion against AGI'ers on a non-AGI list, we're heard it here too many times. Come back when you've developed some respect for the hard work that people have done in this field and when you've gained some understanding into the great efforts involved and sacrifices made.. John From: Aaron Hosford [mailto:[email protected]] I followed your advice and did the same, which gave me some relief, but I still see so many angry/frustrated replies to Tintner that I have quit reading this list. As much as I hate to cast anyone aside or leave them behind, he has made himself utterly intractable, so I'm totally for banning him. On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 4:29 AM, Russell Wallace <[email protected]> wrote: I solved the problem for myself by killfiling Mike years ago, and it seems to me everyone else should do the same, unless you just find arguing with him to be a pleasantly futile pastime, like learning to play the octaventral heebiephone. However, if there's a reason why other people don't find this to be an adequate solution to the problem, then I would say go ahead and ban him from the list. On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 8:03 AM, Ben Goertzel <[email protected]> wrote: I'm curious how many people think we should start a policy of banning obvious trolls from this email list? I don't have an extremely strong opinion one way or the other. However, I note that the presence of so much trolling does cause me to avoid looking at the list most of the time, because my default assumption is that the average post will not be interesting... The obvious inspiration for this question is Mike Tintner. While he has a certain sincerity to him, nevertheless, he is basically a troll on this list in the Internet sense. He thinks everyone researching in the AGI field is badly misguided and tells us so, repetitively, over and over. And he really doesn't understand the basic concepts of computer science -- he thinks there are "non-algorithmic computer programs", or ways to operate computers non-algorithmically... which really is not true if you take any standard definition of "algorithm" ... Occasionally Tintner has spurred interesting discussions. But mostly he just says the same boring, misunderstanding-based stuff over and over again... Anyway, I can go either way on this personally, but I'm curious what other list members think. Should we ban Tintner and any other similar trolls who emerge, or let them use the list as their trolling-ground? Note: I absolutely would NOT want to start banning people for believing AGI is impossible and saying so, or positing unpopular ideas, or saying everyone in the field is misguided, etc. But being sooooo repetitive with the same exact points over and over again -- to the point where you're the most active poster on the list, yet you don't really understand the core technical concepts underlying the field the list exists to discuss -- this verges from nonconformist thinking into trolling, IMO... Curious for others' thoughts.. ? -- Ben On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 10:29 AM, tintner michael <[email protected]> wrote: Samantha: Michael, you think no algorithm can be creative? What do you think results in your own creativity, if any? If it is not a set of biologically encoded algorithms then what exactly is it? If you want to know, listen to: Samantha: Uh, a human baby has to do a lot of bumping up against the world, a lot of grasping, trying to move, trying to focus eyes, learning to make sounds intelligible. It's nondeterministically programmed improvisation - nondeterministically programmed improvised goal-seeking. That's what every infant does when it flails aroundin the ways you mention, that's what you're doing right now as you compose your posts. That's what all forms of creativity entail and very visibly demonstrably entail. You think creatives searching for inspiration, sometimes for years, are following algos - step-by-step preplanned courses of action ? What's the algo for a creative block? What's the algo that drives AGI projectbuilders to say "5 years if we really really try" when he actually hasn't the slightest ideas? What do you think H SImon was talking about when he talked about nonprogrammed, unstructured thinking as distinct from the programmed kind? I have written a lot about this here, Samantha - you sound like you're coming in at the tail-end. There are no creative algoirthms/recipes - algos are just amplified human routines, low level stuff if extremely useful. And whenever an AGI-er starts to offer a concrete example of "creative algorithms" as PM has just done, they only end up offering excuses. Always. On 3 December 2013 01:19, Samantha Atkins <[email protected]> wrote: Michael, you think no algorithm can be creative? What do you think results in your own creativity, if any? If it is not a set of biologically encoded algorithms then what exactly is it? If it is a set of algorithms, however encoded, then why can't it be implemented on a different substrate? Perhaps your notion of "algorithm" is a bit too limited. On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 11:28 AM, tintner michael <[email protected]> wrote: Oh please, PM. This is still dishonest. Ben tried this "read x.." ploy several times - never was anything there. Put up your example of algorithmic creativity for the enlightenment of all here. You can't. Neither can anyone else. Don';t lecture about "reasoning ability" until you're capable of reasoning from empirical examples. On 2 December 2013 19:13, Piaget Modeler <[email protected]> wrote: As a philosopher, I would think that you would like to read. I hope you're not being lazy. Here's a starting point.... http://publications.csail.mit.edu/lcs/pubs/pdf/MIT-LCS-TR-563.pdf As I said, once you have context, I will be happy to discuss this with you. Gain some context and let's discuss. This is the internet, it's not that hard. Cheers, ~PM _____ Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 18:23:29 +0000 Subject: Re: [agi] I guess I don't have AGI all figured out. From: [email protected] To: [email protected] PM;We can't spoon feed each other endlessly. ..... That is the most cowardly and dishonest statement. It is typical. I am sick of this kind of dishonesty. Put up or shut up. On 2 December 2013 18:17, Piaget Modeler <[email protected]> wrote: We can't spoon feed each other endlessly. Do a little research. Read the book. Let's discuss when you've obtained Drescher's thesis (probably online) or read his book. Always happy to discuss... Cheers, ~PM. _____ Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 18:06:54 +0000 Subject: Re: [agi] I guess I don't have AGI all figured out. From: [email protected] To: [email protected] PM The Schema System synthesized new identifiers to represent novel situations Synthesized what new from what? A proper specific example please.Not a sleight-of-hand handwave. I guarantee you're talking nonsense. Prove me wrong. You should be delighted to discuss - this is the most important thing in AGI - far more important than any of the narrow AI techniques you often discuss in detail. On 2 December 2013 17:59, Piaget Modeler <[email protected]> wrote: Gary Drescher's thesis qua book "Made Up Minds". The Schema System synthesized new identifiers to represent novel situations. True Creativity. True Construction. Mike Tintner, this is the meme that you need to surpress: "a creative algorithm is a physical impossibility". It is interfering with your reasoning ability, and creating a blind spot for you. ~PM _____ Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 15:41:44 +0000 Subject: Re: [agi] I guess I don't have AGI all figured out. From: [email protected] To: [email protected] "Theoretically, contrary to Tintner's argument, it would be feasible to use CBR to discover and represent truly novel situations. However, this theoretical argument is not easy" One example of this creativity. From anywhere or anyone.. Actual or theoretical. I repeat : a creative algorithm is a physical impossibility like perpetual motion, the Immaculate Conception, transubstantiation of wine into the blood of Christ and other such religious fictions of creativity. And a bleeding obvious impossibility if you could just once turn your attention from the "architecture" of algorithms to the finished buildings they produce.. Then you'd see algorithms can't produce new building blocks.Only the same old Lego buildings. If no one can give even a theoretical example - not the slightest proof of concept - you are engaging in a Giant Wank. AGI | <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> | Modify Your Subscription <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> -- Ben Goertzel, PhD http://goertzel.org "In an insane world, the sane man must appear to be insane". -- Capt. James T. Kirk <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> ------------------------------------------- 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
