2008/9/6 Mike Tintner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Will,
>
> Yes, humans are manifestly a RADICALLY different machine paradigm- if you
> care to stand back and look at the big picture.
>
> Employ a machine of any kind and in general, you know what you're getting -
> some glitches (esp. with complex programs) etc sure - but basically, in
> general, it will do its job.
What exactly is a desktop computers job?
> Humans are "only human, not a machine." Employ one of those, incl. yourself,
> and, by comparison, you have only a v. limited idea of what you're getting -
> whether they'll do the job at all, to what extent, how well. Employ a
> programmer, a plumber etc etc.. "Can you get a good one these days?..." VAST
> difference.
If you find a new computer that I do not know how it has been
programmed (whether it has linux/windows and what version). You also
lack knowledge of what it is going to do. Aibo is a computer as well!
It follows a program.
> And that's the negative side of our positive side - the fact that we're 1)
> supremely adaptable, and 2) can tackle those problems that no machine or
> current "AGI" - (actually of course, there is no such thing at the mo, only
> pretenders) - can even *begin* to tackle.
>
> Our unreliability
> .
>
> That, I suggest, only comes from having no set structure - no computer
> program - no program of action in the first place. ("Hey, good idea, who
> needs a program?")
You equate set structure with computer program. A computer program is
not set! There is set structure of some sorts in the brain, at the
neural level anyway. so you would have to be more precise in what you
mean by lack of set structure.
Wait, "program of action"? You don't think computer programs are like
lists of things to do in the real world, do you? That is just
something cooked up by the language writers to make things easier to
deal with, a computer program is really only about memory
manipulation. Some of the memory locations might be hooked up to the
real world, but at the end of the day the computer treats it all as
semanticless memory manipulations. Since what controls the memory
manipulations are themselves in memory, they to can be manipulated!
> Here's a simple, extreme example.
>
> "Will, I want you to take up to an hour, and come up with a dance, called
> the "Keyboard Shuffle." (A very "ill-structured" problem.)
How about you go learn about self-modifying assembly language,
preferably with real-time interrupts. That would be a better use of
the time, I think.
Will Pearson
-------------------------------------------
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
