If you can solve a problem by avoiding it then your attitude was part of the problem.
Jim Bromer On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 8:12 PM, Jim Bromer <[email protected]> wrote: > Mike Tintner once challenged me to show how a closed program could compute > any kind of typography character. Even though this wasn't a valid AI > question (an AI program has to be open to input and we human beings cannot > invent every variation of a thing) I came up with a thought experiment to > show how it could be done. If you just wrote a program that made > incremental changes in a simple generator formula the program could > hypothetically get stuck on a few trivial changes and never show that it > was capable of any real variability. So I had to come up with a way to > make sure that it somehow implemented a lot of variability. Mike was not > impressed and I don't think anyone else was either. However, my effort to > respond to the challenge helped me to discover something new. This "new" > thing that I discovered was not very important because it only described > something that we often see in programs that are more flexible. But if you > leave this insight out of a generator program, your program would tend to > be insipid or narrow. > > In the same way Ben's non-topical intervention into my soliloquy was made > at just the right time. It turned out that I had been making a simple error > in approaching the SAT problem which I hadn't seen until just before Ben > made his personal criticism. My most recent insight isn't very interesting > because it is just something that makes a lot of sense, but I hadn't seen > it because I got so entangled up with the problem. To put it another way, > you can't solve a problem by avoiding it. And at this point in history, you > won't find a solution in polynomial time by trying to avoid working with > solutions that are in non-polynomial time. > > Jim Bromer > > > On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 5:52 PM, Mike Archbold via AGI <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> It seems like compression is at the heart of any AI method, or even >> any computer method. The best programs are small (physically). I'm >> not sure you can disentangle compression from generalization. >> >> On 6/16/14, Ben Goertzel via AGI <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Hmm...well, some folks believe one could create a future upload of a >> > physically deceased human via analysis of their online texts... remember >> > Giulio Prisco's idea of Mind Uploading via Gmail... >> > >> > http://giulioprisco.blogspot.hk/2010/09/mind-uploading-via-gmail.html >> > >> > Maybe, post-Singularity, Jim Bromer's upload will find a polynomial time >> > solution to 3SAT? >> > >> > >> > ;-) >> > ben >> > >> > >> > >> > On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 8:55 PM, Anastasios Tsiolakidis < >> > [email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> Shame on you Ben, again! He Creative Commons licensed his mind, that's >> >> why. >> >> >> >> AT >> >> >> >> On 16.06.2014, at 14:52, "Ben Goertzel via AGI" <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> I wonder why you enjoy talking to yourself on a public email list? >> ;-) >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 8:48 PM, Jim Bromer via AGI <[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> I am probably wrong. The solution to finding a solution to a logical >> >>> satisfiability problem in polynomial time is probably going to be >> based >> >>> on >> >>> a natural solution that does an accounting of the number of solutions >> to >> >>> the logical problem. >> >>> >> >>> Jim Bromer >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Jim Bromer <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> Traditional logic is a compressed format. Since there are so many >> >>>> possible equivalences we know that logic is not a perfectly packed >> >>>> compression method. So there is no need for a list of alternative >> >>>> compression conversion algorithms which were in a list of possible >> >>>> algorithms that was in np. (I expressed that idea incorrectly. I >> should >> >>>> have talked about a list of possible algorithms which were in exp >> space >> >>>> or >> >>>> something like that. If the list of possible compression-conversion >> >>>> algorithms were in np then that implies that finding an algorithm >> >>>> solution >> >>>> might itself be in np.) >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> Jim Bromer >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 8:36 AM, Jim Bromer <[email protected]> >> >>>> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>>> >> Of course I have no idea if this is even possible. But my next >> >>>>> question is whether the inclusion of the compression formatting with >> >>>>> the >> >>>>> compressed string is inherently too inefficient to be useful.. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Presuming that different classes of logical formulas could be >> >>>>> compressed in different ways, is it possible to use a single >> >>>>> polynomial >> >>>>> time algorithm to do this? It might be possible, for example, using >> a >> >>>>> numerical method to choose an algorithm based on a numbering system >> >>>>> (where >> >>>>> an ordering of algorithms might, to continue with this conjectural >> >>>>> example, >> >>>>> be associated with a log-based number - an n-ary number - to choose >> >>>>> the >> >>>>> algorithm from a system of algorithms which are in their entirety in >> >>>>> np). >> >>>>> This is too complicated for me, but if the parts of the algorithms >> >>>>> were >> >>>>> ordered and enumerated then large numbers could be used to refer to >> a >> >>>>> particular ordering scheme. I am just trying to establish that there >> >>>>> could >> >>>>> be a way to express variations in how a compression conversion >> method >> >>>>> might >> >>>>> be chosen even if the entire list of algorithms were themselves in >> np. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> But, is a compression method which includes some way to describe or >> >>>>> refer to the particular compression scheme used in the compression >> >>>>> going to >> >>>>> be so much less efficient than a system that leaves that kind of >> >>>>> information out to make this whole idea theoretically impossible? I >> >>>>> think >> >>>>> that it is theoretically possible. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Jim Bromer >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 8:20 AM, Jim Bromer <[email protected]> >> >>>>> wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Jim Bromer >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 9:20 PM, Jim Bromer <[email protected]> >> >>>>>> wrote: >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>>> I have spent some time looking at the problem of finding a >> >>>>>>> polynomial >> >>>>>>> time solution to logical satisfiability and I have come to a few >> >>>>>>> conclusions about the problem. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> There may be a natural solution, but if there is, I certainly >> can't >> >>>>>>> see it. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> So if this is at all feasible, a more contrived method needs to be >> >>>>>>> concocted. I believe the solution would have to use an alternative >> >>>>>>> way to >> >>>>>>> compress a logical problem so that individual solutions could be >> >>>>>>> turned out >> >>>>>>> in polynomial time. I can imagine compressing-some- logical >> formulas >> >>>>>>> that >> >>>>>>> way but I can't think of a general method. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> But, since it looks like there is no one compression formatting >> that >> >>>>>>> could be used for every possible logical formula I believe that a >> >>>>>>> solution >> >>>>>>> - if one is feasible - would have to use different compression >> >>>>>>> encryptions >> >>>>>>> for different formulas. The formulas, encoded in one of >> >>>>>>> these yet-to-be-invented compression formats would probably need >> to >> >>>>>>> contain >> >>>>>>> the encoding methods used to explain how they were encoded, since >> >>>>>>> different >> >>>>>>> formulas (or different classes of formulas) would have to be >> >>>>>>> compressed >> >>>>>>> differently. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> But, then since a part of logical formula that had been partially >> >>>>>>> expressed in one of these formats would, using this theoretical >> >>>>>>> framework, >> >>>>>>> need to be converted into another compression format for the next >> >>>>>>> part of >> >>>>>>> the formula, that suggests that the compressions would have to be >> >>>>>>> converted >> >>>>>>> into other compressions without fully decompressing them and this >> >>>>>>> compression transformation would have to take place in polynomial >> >>>>>>> time. So >> >>>>>>> one compressed format would have to be transformable into another >> >>>>>>> format as >> >>>>>>> the formula was converted in a step by step fashion. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> So in conclusion: >> >>>>>>> 1. Different classes of logical formulas would have to be >> converted >> >>>>>>> into different compression formats and this compression would >> have to >> >>>>>>> be >> >>>>>>> done efficiently. >> >>>>>>> 2. The new compressed formulas would have to be efficiently >> readable >> >>>>>>> so, in the worse case, individual solutions could be read out >> >>>>>>> efficiently. >> >>>>>>> 3. The individuated compression formats would have to >> >>>>>>> include something about the encoding used for the formatting. >> >>>>>>> 4. These formats would have to be convertible into another format >> >>>>>>> efficiently in order to process the logical formula in a stepwise >> >>>>>>> fashion. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> This shows that there are at least 3 different conversion or >> >>>>>>> transformation methods necessary for the new individuated >> >>>>>>> compression >> >>>>>>> methods. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> An initial analysis of the structure of a logical formula might be >> >>>>>>> used to immediately convert the formula into a different format >> >>>>>>> without >> >>>>>>> going through a step by step conversion- reconversion process. But >> >>>>>>> even if >> >>>>>>> that was possible we would still want to be able to treat logical >> >>>>>>> formulas >> >>>>>>> in a step by step manner. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> Of course I have no idea if this is even possible. But my next >> >>>>>>> question is whether the inclusion of the compression formatting >> with >> >>>>>>> the >> >>>>>>> compressed string is inherently too inefficient to be useful.. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> Jim Bromer >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>> >> >>> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >> >>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/212726-deec6279> | >> >>> Modify >> >>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription >> >>> <http://www.listbox.com> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Ben Goertzel, PhD >> >> http://goertzel.org >> >> >> >> "In an insane world, the sane man must appear to be insane". -- Capt. >> >> James T. Kirk >> >> >> >> "Emancipate yourself from mental slavery / None but ourselves can free >> >> our >> >> minds" -- Robert Nesta Marley >> >> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >> >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/14050631-7d925eb1> | >> >> Modify >> >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> >> >> Your Subscription <http://www.listbox.com> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Ben Goertzel, PhD >> > http://goertzel.org >> > >> > "In an insane world, the sane man must appear to be insane". -- Capt. >> James >> > T. Kirk >> > >> > "Emancipate yourself from mental slavery / None but ourselves can free >> our >> > minds" -- Robert Nesta Marley >> > >> > >> > >> > ------------------------------------------- >> > AGI >> > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now >> > RSS Feed: >> https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/11943661-d9279dae >> > Modify Your Subscription: >> > https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; >> > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com >> > >> >> >> ------------------------------------------- >> AGI >> Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now >> RSS Feed: >> https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/24379807-f5817f28 >> Modify Your Subscription: >> https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; >> Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com >> > > ------------------------------------------- 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
