Mike, In that case I do not see how your view differs from simplistic dualism, as Terren cautioned. If your goal is to make a creativity machine, in what sense would the machine be non-algorithmic? Physical random processes?
--Abram On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 6:59 PM, Mike Tintner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Abram, > > Thanks. V. helpful and interesting. Yes, on further examination, these > interactionist guys seem, as you say, to be trying to take into account the > embeddedness of the computer. > > But no, there's still a huge divide between them and me. I would liken them > in the context of this discussion, to Pei who tries to argue that NARS is > "non-algorithmic", because the program is continuously changing. - and > therefore satisfies the objections of classical objectors to AI/AGI. > > Well, both these guys and Pei are still v. much algorithmic in any > reasonable sense of the word - still following *structures,* if v. > sophisticated (and continuously changing) structures, of thought. > > And what I am asserting is a paradigm of a creative machine, which starts > as, and is, NON-algorithmic and UNstructured in all its activities, albeit > that it acquires and creates a multitude of algorithms, or > routines/structures, for *parts* of those activities. For example, when you > write a post, nearly every word and a great many phrases and even odd > sentences, will be automatically, algorithmically produced. But the whole > post, and most paras will *not* be - and *could not* be. > > A creative machine has infinite combinative potential. An algorithmic, > programmed machine has strictly limited combinativity.. > > And a keyboard is surely the near perfect symbol of infinite, unstructured > combinativity. It is being, and has been, used in endlessly creative ways - > and is, along with the blank page and pencil, the central tool of our > civilisation's creativity. Those randomly arranged letters - clearly > designed to be infinitely recombined - are the antithesis of a programmed > machine. > > So however those guys account for that keyboard, I don't see them as in any > way accounting for it in my sense, or in its true, full usage. But thanks > for your comments. (Oh and I did understand re Bayes - I was and am still > arguing he isn't valid in many cases, period). > > >> Mike, >> >> The reason I decided that what you are arguing for is essentially an >> interactive model is this quote: >> >> "But that is obviously only the half of it.Computers are obviously >> much more than that - and Turing machines. You just have to look at >> them. It's staring you in the face. There's something they have that >> Turing machines don't. See it? Terren? >> >> They have - a keyboard." >> >> A keyboard is precisely what the interaction theorists are trying to >> account for! Plus the mouse, the ethernet port, et cetera. >> >> Moreover, your general comments fit into the model if interpreted >> judiciously. You make a distinction between rule-based and creative >> behavior; rule-based behavior could be thought of as isolated >> processing of input (receive input, process without interference, >> output result) while creative behavior is behavior resulting from >> continual interaction with and exploration of the external world. Your >> concept of organisms as "organizers" only makes sense when I see it in >> this light: a human organizes the environment by interaction with it, >> while a Turing machine is unable to do this because it cannot >> explore/experiment/discover. >> >> -Abram >> >> On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 1:07 PM, Mike Tintner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >>> >>> Abram, >>> >>> Thanks for reply. But I don't understand what you see as the connection. >>> An >>> interaction machine from my brief googling is one which has physical >>> organs. >>> >>> Any factory machine can be thought of as having organs. What I am trying >>> to >>> forge is a new paradigm of a creative, free machine as opposed to that >>> exemplified by most actual machines, which are rational, deterministic >>> machines. The latter can only engage in any task in set ways - and >>> therefore >>> engage and combine their organs in set combinations and sequences. >>> Creative >>> machines have a more or less infinite range of possible ways of going >>> about >>> things, and can combine their organs in a virtually infinite range of >>> combinations, (which gives them a slight advantage, adaptively :) ). >>> Organisms *are* creative machines; computers and robots *could* be (and >>> are, >>> when combined with humans), AGI's will *have* to be. >>> >>> (To talk of creative machines, more specifically, as I did, as >>> keyboards/"organisers" is to focus on the mechanics of this infinite >>> combinativity of organs). >>> >>> Interaction machines do not seem in any way then to entail what I'm >>> talking >>> about - "creative machines" - keyboards/ organisers - infinite >>> combinativity >>> - or the *creation,* as quite distinct from *following* of >>> programs/algorithms and routines.. >>> >>> >>> >>> Abram/MT:>> If you think it's all been said, please point me to the >>> philosophy of AI >>>>> >>>>> that includes it. >>>> >>>> I believe what you are suggesting is best understood as an interaction >>>> machine. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> General references: >>>> >>>> http://www.cs.brown.edu/people/dqg/Papers/wurzburg.ps >>>> >>>> http://www.cs.brown.edu/people/pw/papers/ficacm.ps >>>> >>>> http://www.la-acm.org/Archives/laacm9912.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The concept that seems most relevant to AI is the learning theory >>>> provided by "inductive turing machines", but I cannot find a good >>>> single reference for that. (I am not knowledgable on this subject, I >>>> just have heard the idea before.) >>>> >>>> --Abram >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------- >>>> agi >>>> Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now >>>> RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ >>>> 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/ >>> 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/ >> 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/ > 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/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=111637683-c8fa51 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
