Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky

2023-03-15 Thread spudboy100 via Everything List 
Master Resch, you could told us ahead of time that you were a Pantheist!!! 
Having said that, it's ok, my favorite philosopher also is. John Leslie, author 
and inventor of Hostage Chess.
John A. Leslie - Wikipedia
I loved his stuff and have no issue with pantheism and minds. Also, I blindly 
go for afterlife theories whoever has a brain and peddles these unto me. Could 
be Kurzweil, Tipler, Prisco, Moravec, Tipler, Tim Anderson @ Georgia Tech, you 
name em! Yes your ideas as well. 
I simply advise people to come up with something scientific concerning, 
consciousness, as need more intellectual substance. It's a cautionary not and 
this is not the hill I choose to die upon. Just wanting to know how a human 
eqivalent happened, sans, carbon + water :-)


-Original Message-
From: Jason Resch 
To: Everything List 
Sent: Wed, Mar 15, 2023 8:46 am
Subject: Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky


On Wed, Mar 15, 2023, 8:45 AM Jason Resch  wrote:



On Wed, Mar 15, 2023, 7:59 AM  wrote:

I am a not a neurobiologist, old son. I could try to see if there are any 
papers out on grey goo becoming self-aware and self-reflecting?  My Definition! 

Anything with a "self" is conscious.Anything with "awareness" is conscious.
Therefore your definition of "self awareness", by restricting consciousness to 
things that are only aware of oneself but not other things in the environment, 
you may only be capturing some, but not all classes of consciousness entities.
Likewise by defining consciousness as "self reflection", you may overly 
restrict consciousness only to those selves which happen to reflect upon that 
self, and perhaps wrongly deny consciousness to selves who do not self reflect.
It is possible that reflection (at least reflection on some level) is necessary 
to consciousness. But I have not seen a strong argument for it yet. I do think 
the capacities for self-awareness and self-reflection exist in humans, but do 
we do it all the time?
Are we self reflecting and self aware of ourself in every moment of our 
consciousness? What about raw sensory experiences when we live in the moment, 
such as when catching a wave or riding a rollercoaster?
Are fruit flies self-reflecting and self-aware? Are they consciousness of the 
presence of a banana on the counter? These questions keep me up at night.




If you have a paper on how consciousness arises from intel, Nvida, and AMD 
chips please supply the link. It's chips and salsa to me. 

I think focusing on hardware is a red herring. Consciousness is a high level 
phenomenon and I believe it exists in high level abstractions of information 
processing and computation. Seeking the magic of consciousness in the 
neurochemicals or silicon chips is in my view, as misguided as seeking to find 
it in the quarks and electrons.
 



If you claim something just spoke from a D-Wave superchilled box and it asked 
how you were doing, I'd consider that a true possibility. Photonics? Ok lets 
roll with it. 


Trace the physical causes behind someone uttering the words "I am conscious" 
back through the signals in the nerves of their vocal cords into the deepest 
recesses of their brain. There you will find consciousness as the processes 
that stand behind the person thinking and reasoning and concluding, and then 
deciding to utter the words "I am conscious".
I think you can do the same for any silicon or quantum computer, in principle. 
Consciousness, presumably, is what causes us to talk about consciousness. It's 
therefore something that exists in the causal chain of physics, and something 
amenable to investigation.
Jason





-Original Message-
From: John Clark 
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Cc: jasonre...@gmail.com 
Sent: Mon, Mar 13, 2023 2:08 pm
Subject: Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky

On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 12:55 AM spudboy100 via Everything List 
 wrote:


> I still need to know how it became conscious when just using chips and data

I'll tell you just as soon as you tell me how 3 pounds of gray goo inside of a 
vat made of bone that is sitting on your shoulders manages to be conscious.  
John K Clark    See what's on my new list at  Extropolis
vmb

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv04H7Ry%3DctkkhfRUj_w5gid5u6txq-XYfsmbG8DkUXJ2Q%40mail.gmail.com.


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://group

Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky

2023-03-15 Thread Jason Resch 
On Wed, Mar 15, 2023, 8:45 AM Jason Resch  wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2023, 7:59 AM  wrote:
>
>> I am a not a neurobiologist, old son. I could try to see if there are any
>> papers out on grey goo becoming self-aware and self-reflecting?  My
>> Definition!
>>
>
> Anything with a "self" is conscious.
> Anything with "awareness" is conscious.
>
> Therefore your definition of "self awareness", by restricting
> consciousness to things that are only aware of oneself but not other things
> in the environment, you may only be capturing some, but not all classes of
> consciousness entities.
>
> Likewise by defining consciousness as "self reflection", you may overly
> restrict consciousness only to those selves which happen to reflect upon
> that self, and perhaps wrongly deny consciousness to selves who do not self
> reflect.
>
> It is possible that reflection (at least reflection on some level) is
> necessary to consciousness. But I have not seen a strong argument for it
> yet. I do think the capacities for self-awareness and self-reflection exist
> in humans, but do we do it all the time?
>
> Are we self reflecting and self aware of ourself in every moment of our
> consciousness? What about raw sensory experiences when we live in the
> moment, such as when catching a wave or riding a rollercoaster?
>
> Are fruit flies self-reflecting and self-aware? Are they consciousness of
> the presence of a banana on the counter? These questions keep me up at
> night.
>
>
>
>
>> If you have a paper on how consciousness arises from intel, Nvida, and
>> AMD chips please supply the link. It's chips and salsa to me.
>>
>
> I think focusing on hardware is a red herring. Consciousness is a high
> level phenomenon and I believe it exists in high level abstractions of
> information processing and computation. Seeking the magic of consciousness
> in the neurochemicals or silicon chips is in my view, as misguided as
> seeking to find it in the quarks and electrons.
>
>
>
>
>
>> If you claim something just spoke from a D-Wave superchilled box and it
>> asked how you were doing, I'd consider that a true possibility. Photonics?
>> Ok lets roll with it.
>>
>
> Trace the physical causes behind someone uttering the words "I am
> conscious" back through the signals in the nerves of their vocal cords into
> the deepest recesses of their brain. There you will find consciousness as
> the processes that stand behind the person thinking and reasoning and
> concluding, and then deciding to utter the words "I am conscious".
>
> I think you can do the same for any silicon or quantum computer, in
> principle. Consciousness, presumably, is what causes us to talk about
> consciousness. It's therefore something that exists in the causal chain of
> physics, and something amenable to investigation.
>
> Jason
>
>
>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: John Clark 
>> To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
>> Cc: jasonre...@gmail.com 
>> Sent: Mon, Mar 13, 2023 2:08 pm
>> Subject: Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 12:55 AM spudboy100 via Everything List <
>> everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>>
>> *> I still need to know how it became conscious when just using chips and
>> data*
>>
>>
>> I'll tell you just as soon as you tell me how 3 pounds of gray goo
>> inside of a vat made of bone that is sitting on your shoulders manages to
>> be conscious.
>>
>> John K ClarkSee what's on my new list at  Extropolis
>> <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>
>> vmb
>>
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Everything List" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv04H7Ry%3DctkkhfRUj_w5gid5u6txq-XYfsmbG8DkUXJ2Q%40mail.gmail.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv04H7Ry%3DctkkhfRUj_w5gid5u6txq-XYfsmbG8DkUXJ2Q%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CA%2BBCJUgOh3J%2BWkRowuy3BTR48_C9RGVrhxLsVtg-k7UxzKsXnQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky

2023-03-15 Thread spudboy100 via Everything List 
We ain't got (Forget Chomsky!) Marvin Minsky's Guy in a Box. Hal-9000 ain't 
arrived yet.
Now, if one is less driven by theory/ideology, one may focus on what is best 
for the human species?
What would be best would-be innovation machinery geared toward making 
discoveries and inventions that human research teams, that we wouldn't arrive 
at for decades of a century. 
There's 8.2 billion people on the planet if we need somebody to chat with, make 
rhymes, sum up permitted news items, articles, before 9/21/2021. (Chat3). For 
science articles it works less well then a parrot. I have tried.


-Original Message-
From: Telmo Menezes 
To: Everything List 
Sent: Mon, Mar 13, 2023 6:46 am
Subject: Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky

#yiv5524577622 p.yiv5524577622MsoNormal, #yiv5524577622 
p.yiv5524577622MsoNoSpacing{margin:0;}

Am Mo, 13. Mär 2023, um 05:45, schrieb Brent Meeker:

An operational test for intelligence requires that ability to act in the world 
to achieve goals.  LLM's are intelligent in that they act to satisfy prompts.  
If you went to the beach and you said to a crab, "Write in the sand a short 
poem about waves."  and the crab scratched out:
 
 Born
 of wind and
 earth's embrace
 an ocean's memory of
 storms  beyond the horizon
 its undulating information uselessly inscribed
 in the meandering sand
 finds voice at last
 its fall a sigh a
 single syllable
 of surf
 
 You'd think the crab was pretty smart.  An LLM could do that.  The only reason 
for us thinking it is not intelligent is that we know how the LLM does it.  
When I first took a class in AI fifty years ago at UCLA. The Professor 
explained that the definition of intelligence was "whatever computers can't do 
yet." 


My first AI class was 27 years ago. The professor also mentioned that, but he 
started with the question: "why do we study artificial intelligence and not 
artificial stupidity?", and his answer was: "because stupidity is not a scarce 
resource".

Telmo



 Brent



On 3/12/2023 9:29 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote:

Does it really display intelligent behavior, and now you will need to define 
intelligent behavior with testable parameters. Do humans display intelligent 
behavior? How often, and how consistently? Many say crows do.

This was part of my reason in hectoring JC on this. A neurobiologist tells, via 
research how parts of the human brain behave, and thus produce intelligence and 
(non-philosophically) consciousness. What part of the server farm enacts the 
illusion (I think) of intelligence? 




-Original Message-
 From: Stathis Papaioannou 
 To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
 Sent: Sun, Mar 12, 2023 9:29 pm
 Subject: Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky



On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 at 12:18, Jason Resch  wrote:



On Sun, Mar 12, 2023, 8:57 PM Stathis Papaioannou  wrote:



On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 at 04:12, Lawrence Crowell 
 wrote:

Remember no matter haw complex an algorithm it is ultimately a lot of Boolean 
switching acting on what ever data is dumped into it.


That means that if the entity displays intelligent behaviour, Boolean switching 
acting on whatever data is dumped into it can generate intelligent behaviour. 



Boolean logic gates (and, or, not) are universal. There's no finitely 
describable behavior that can't be replicated by the repeated application of 
boolean logic gates paired with a memory.


Yes. But more generally, even from a position of ignorance, if you don’t 
believe that something made from electrical circuitry (or whatever) can display 
intelligent behaviour, and something made from electrical circuitry does in 
fact display intelligent behaviour, that means you were wrong.



--
Stathis Papaioannou
-- 
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
 To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAH%3D2ypXZLOOeKndehY1w3iseRPbrbF1HGG1dAk9rDh%3DvOtfVFA%40mail.gmail.com
.
-- 
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
 To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/922538855.1640289.1678681763911%40mail.yahoo.com.



-- 
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
 To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/a38a6774-b5db-b940-d232-1d7f7a

Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky

2023-03-15 Thread spudboy100 via Everything List 
Thinking and looking things up in a database like an LLM does to respond to a 
human is one thing, and a bs-machine is another.
Though GPT3 was fun parody music was excellent!


-Original Message-
From: Jason Resch 
To: spudboy...@aol.com
Cc: Everything List 
Sent: Mon, Mar 13, 2023 12:14 pm
Subject: Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky



On Mon, Mar 13, 2023, 12:55 AM  wrote:

Would it be more accurate to think that unless something is driven by need, as 
in an amygdala, it is not alive. This may be a different question than is it 
intelligent, is it conscious? 

I think that's a reasonable definition of life. Even if the need is just the 
need to exist and persist, which is the root need on which evolutionary forces 
work.


I still need to know how it became conscious when just using chips and data? 
Would this then favor a pantheist point of view, or even panentheistic  one?

Can you think without being conscious, can you understand without being 
conscious, can you perceive without being conscious, can you feel with being 
conscious, can you know without being conscious?
Unless you answered 'yes' to all these questions, there are some behaviors and 
functions which necessitate consciousness. If we reproduce such functions in a 
machine then we have made a conscious machine.
Jason 



Me don't know? 






-Original Message-
From: Jason Resch 
To: Everything List 
Sent: Mon, Mar 13, 2023 12:36 am
Subject: Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky



On Mon, Mar 13, 2023, 12:29 AM spudboy100 via Everything List 
 wrote:

Does it really display intelligent behavior, and now you will need to define 
intelligent behavior with testable parameters. Do humans display intelligent 
behavior? How often, and how consistently? Many say crows do.
This was part of my reason in hectoring JC on this. A neurobiologist tells, via 
research how parts of the human brain behave, and thus produce intelligence and 
(non-philosophically) consciousness. What part of the server farm enacts the 
illusion (I think) of intelligence? 



https://alwaysasking.com/when-will-ai-take-over/#What_is_Intelligence

According to the agent-environment interaction model of intelligence, something 
is intelligent if it:
“perceives its environment and interacts with it in a manner consistent with 
achieving a goal.”
This definition captures the full spectrum of intelligent behavior, regardless 
of how simple or complex it is. It includes creatures from worms to humans, and 
machines from thermostats to chess playing AIs.
Jason 




-Original Message-
From: Stathis Papaioannou 
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sun, Mar 12, 2023 9:29 pm
Subject: Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky



On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 at 12:18, Jason Resch  wrote:



On Sun, Mar 12, 2023, 8:57 PM Stathis Papaioannou  wrote:



On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 at 04:12, Lawrence Crowell 
 wrote:

Remember no matter haw complex an algorithm it is ultimately a lot of Boolean 
switching acting on what ever data is dumped into it.

That means that if the entity displays intelligent behaviour, Boolean switching 
acting on whatever data is dumped into it can generate intelligent behaviour.  



Boolean logic gates (and, or, not) are universal. There's no finitely 
describable behavior that can't be replicated by the repeated application of 
boolean logic gates paired with a memory.

Yes. But more generally, even from a position of ignorance, if you don’t 
believe that something made from electrical circuitry (or whatever) can display 
intelligent behaviour, and something made from electrical circuitry does in 
fact display intelligent behaviour, that means you were wrong.

-- 
Stathis Papaioannou-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAH%3D2ypXZLOOeKndehY1w3iseRPbrbF1HGG1dAk9rDh%3DvOtfVFA%40mail.gmail.com.
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/922538855.1640289.1678681763911%40mail.yahoo.com.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CA%2BBCJUjJt664RWY4as7etiAnPYZVVbmeHRwr9DnwQ-2S%2B2L1Nw%40mail.gmail.com.

-- 
You received this message because you are su

Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky

2023-03-15 Thread spudboy100 via Everything List 
I am a not a neurobiologist, old son. I could try to see if there are any 
papers out on grey goo becoming self-aware and self-reflecting?  My Definition! 
If you have a paper on how consciousness arises from intel, Nvida, and AMD 
chips please supply the link. It's chips and salsa to me. 
If you claim something just spoke from a D-Wave superchilled box and it asked 
how you were doing, I'd consider that a true possibility. Photonics? Ok lets 
roll with it. 


-Original Message-
From: John Clark 
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Cc: jasonre...@gmail.com 
Sent: Mon, Mar 13, 2023 2:08 pm
Subject: Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky

On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 12:55 AM spudboy100 via Everything List 
 wrote:


> I still need to know how it became conscious when just using chips and data

I'll tell you just as soon as you tell me how 3 pounds of gray goo inside of a 
vat made of bone that is sitting on your shoulders manages to be conscious.  
John K Clark    See what's on my new list at  Extropolis
vmb

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv04H7Ry%3DctkkhfRUj_w5gid5u6txq-XYfsmbG8DkUXJ2Q%40mail.gmail.com.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/680348776.214384.1678881566465%40mail.yahoo.com.

ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky

2023-03-14 Thread John Clark 
Brent Meeker weote:

*> So there were 4e3,000,000,000 possible genomes of that length.*


Yes and that number is vastly greater than the number of atoms in the
observable universe, so nobody thinks there is only one way to make
intelligence, so there must be an astronomical number of ways to arrange
those 3 billion base pairs that would result in a human that was superior
to every other human being who has ever existed in intelligence or kindness
or strength or health or beauty or any other criteria you care to name. And
there must be an astronomical number of ways to arrange those 3 billion
base pairs that would produce a being who is not a human but was superior
to even the Greatest Theoretical Possible Human.

*> Evolution found an intelligent one pretty quick.*


I would not say 3 1/2 billion years to produce intelligence was "pretty
quick", but I admit the wiring diagram of a human brain is far more
complicated than that of a modern microprocessor, but I think all those
wheels within wheels and pasted on bells and whistles are a sign of
weakness not of strength. The difference is just what you would expect
between something that came about through random mutation and natural
selection and something that came out of the mind of an intelligent human
engineer.

And there are other examples of Evolution's poor design abilities: in the
eye of any vertebrate animal, the blood vessels that feed those cells and
the nerves that communicate with them are not in the back of the eye as
would be logical but at the front so light must pass through them before
the light hits the light sensitive cells, this makes vision less sharp than
it would otherwise be and creates a blind spot right in the middle of the
visual field. No amount of spin can turn that dopey mess into a good
design, a human engineer would have to be dead drunk to come up with a
hodgepodge like that.

John K ClarkSee what's on my new list at  Extropolis

uty

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv37wav0LA9UDizgMyry5NQJ2c7h_vY%3DiJ4HXh3tTvQ6yQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky

2023-03-13 Thread John Clark 
On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 12:55 AM spudboy100 via Everything List <
everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:

*> I still need to know how it became conscious when just using chips and
> data*


I'll tell you just as soon as you tell me how 3 pounds of gray goo inside
of a vat made of bone that is sitting on your shoulders manages to be
conscious.

John K ClarkSee what's on my new list at  Extropolis

vmb

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv04H7Ry%3DctkkhfRUj_w5gid5u6txq-XYfsmbG8DkUXJ2Q%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky

2023-03-13 Thread Jason Resch 
On Mon, Mar 13, 2023, 12:55 AM  wrote:

> Would it be more accurate to think that unless something is driven by
> need, as in an amygdala, it is not alive. This may be a different question
> than is it intelligent, is it conscious?
>

I think that's a reasonable definition of life. Even if the need is just
the need to exist and persist, which is the root need on which evolutionary
forces work.


> I still need to know how it became conscious when just using chips and
> data? Would this then favor a pantheist point of view, or even
> panentheistic  one?
>

Can you think without being conscious, can you understand without being
conscious, can you perceive without being conscious, can you feel with
being conscious, can you know without being conscious?

Unless you answered 'yes' to all these questions, there are some behaviors
and functions which necessitate consciousness. If we reproduce such
functions in a machine then we have made a conscious machine.

Jason



> Me don't know?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jason Resch 
> To: Everything List 
> Sent: Mon, Mar 13, 2023 12:36 am
> Subject: Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2023, 12:29 AM spudboy100 via Everything List <
> everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>
> Does it really display intelligent behavior, and now you will need to
> define intelligent behavior with testable parameters. Do humans display
> intelligent behavior? How often, and how consistently? Many say crows do.
>
> This was part of my reason in hectoring JC on this. A neurobiologist
> tells, via research how parts of the human brain behave, and thus produce
> intelligence and (non-philosophically) consciousness. What part of the
> server farm enacts the illusion (I think) of intelligence?
>
>
> https://alwaysasking.com/when-will-ai-take-over/#What_is_Intelligence
>
> According to the agent-environment interaction model of intelligence,
> something is intelligent if it:
>
> “perceives its environment and interacts with it in a manner consistent
> with achieving a goal.”
>
> This definition captures the full spectrum of intelligent behavior,
> regardless of how simple or complex it is. It includes creatures from worms
> to humans, and machines from thermostats to chess playing AIs.
>
> Jason
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Stathis Papaioannou 
> To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
> Sent: Sun, Mar 12, 2023 9:29 pm
> Subject: Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky
>
>
>
> On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 at 12:18, Jason Resch  wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 12, 2023, 8:57 PM Stathis Papaioannou 
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 at 04:12, Lawrence Crowell <
> goldenfieldquaterni...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Remember no matter haw complex an algorithm it is ultimately a lot of
> Boolean switching acting on what ever data is dumped into it.
>
>
> That means that if the entity displays intelligent behaviour, Boolean
> switching acting on whatever data is dumped into it can generate
> intelligent behaviour.
>
>
> Boolean logic gates (and, or, not) are universal. There's no finitely
> describable behavior that can't be replicated by the repeated application
> of boolean logic gates paired with a memory.
>
>
> Yes. But more generally, even from a position of ignorance, if you don’t
> believe that something made from electrical circuitry (or whatever) can
> display intelligent behaviour, and something made from electrical circuitry
> does in fact display intelligent behaviour, that means you were wrong.
>
> --
> Stathis Papaioannou
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
>
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAH%3D2ypXZLOOeKndehY1w3iseRPbrbF1HGG1dAk9rDh%3DvOtfVFA%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAH%3D2ypXZLOOeKndehY1w3iseRPbrbF1HGG1dAk9rDh%3DvOtfVFA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/922538855.1640289.1678681763911%40mail.yahoo.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/92253

Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky

2023-03-13 Thread Telmo Menezes 


Am Mo, 13. Mär 2023, um 05:45, schrieb Brent Meeker:
> An operational test for intelligence requires that ability to act in the 
> world to achieve goals.  LLM's are intelligent in that they act to satisfy 
> prompts.  If you went to the beach and you said to a crab, "Write in the sand 
> a short poem about waves."  and the crab scratched out:
> 
> Born
> of wind and
> earth's embrace
> an ocean's memory of
> storms  beyond the horizon
> its undulating information uselessly inscribed
> in the meandering sand
> finds voice at last
> its fall a sigh a
> single syllable
> of surf
> 
> You'd think the crab was pretty smart.  An LLM could do that.  The only 
> reason for us thinking it is not intelligent is that we know how the LLM does 
> it.  When I first took a class in AI fifty years ago at UCLA. The Professor 
> explained that the definition of intelligence was "whatever computers can't 
> do yet." 

My first AI class was 27 years ago. The professor also mentioned that, but he 
started with the question: "why do we study artificial intelligence and not 
artificial stupidity?", and his answer was: "because stupidity is not a scarce 
resource".

Telmo

> 
> Brent
> 
> 
> 
> On 3/12/2023 9:29 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote:
>> Does it really display intelligent behavior, and now you will need to define 
>> intelligent behavior with testable parameters. Do humans display intelligent 
>> behavior? How often, and how consistently? Many say crows do.
>> 
>> This was part of my reason in hectoring JC on this. A neurobiologist tells, 
>> via research how parts of the human brain behave, and thus produce 
>> intelligence and (non-philosophically) consciousness. What part of the 
>> server farm enacts the illusion (I think) of intelligence? 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Stathis Papaioannou 
>> To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
>> Sent: Sun, Mar 12, 2023 9:29 pm
>> Subject: Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 at 12:18, Jason Resch  wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Sun, Mar 12, 2023, 8:57 PM Stathis Papaioannou  
>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 at 04:12, Lawrence Crowell 
>>>>  wrote:
>>>>> Remember no matter haw complex an algorithm it is ultimately a lot of 
>>>>> Boolean switching acting on what ever data is dumped into it.
>>>> 
>>>> That means that if the entity displays intelligent behaviour, Boolean 
>>>> switching acting on whatever data is dumped into it can generate 
>>>> intelligent behaviour. 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Boolean logic gates (and, or, not) are universal. There's no finitely 
>>> describable behavior that can't be replicated by the repeated application 
>>> of boolean logic gates paired with a memory.
>> 
>> Yes. But more generally, even from a position of ignorance, if you don’t 
>> believe that something made from electrical circuitry (or whatever) can 
>> display intelligent behaviour, and something made from electrical circuitry 
>> does in fact display intelligent behaviour, that means you were wrong.
>>> 
>> --
>> Stathis Papaioannou
>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "Everything List" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAH%3D2ypXZLOOeKndehY1w3iseRPbrbF1HGG1dAk9rDh%3DvOtfVFA%40mail.gmail.com
>>  
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAH%3D2ypXZLOOeKndehY1w3iseRPbrbF1HGG1dAk9rDh%3DvOtfVFA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "Everything List" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/922538855.1640289.1678681763911%40mail.yahoo.com
>>  
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/922538855.1640289.1678681763911%40mail.yahoo.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribe

Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky

2023-03-12 Thread spudboy100 via Everything List 
Would it be more accurate to think that unless something is driven by need, as 
in an amygdala, it is not alive. This may be a different question than is it 
intelligent, is it conscious? 
I still need to know how it became conscious when just using chips and data? 
Would this then favor a pantheist point of view, or even panentheistic  one?
Me don't know? 






-Original Message-
From: Jason Resch 
To: Everything List 
Sent: Mon, Mar 13, 2023 12:36 am
Subject: Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky



On Mon, Mar 13, 2023, 12:29 AM spudboy100 via Everything List 
 wrote:

Does it really display intelligent behavior, and now you will need to define 
intelligent behavior with testable parameters. Do humans display intelligent 
behavior? How often, and how consistently? Many say crows do.
This was part of my reason in hectoring JC on this. A neurobiologist tells, via 
research how parts of the human brain behave, and thus produce intelligence and 
(non-philosophically) consciousness. What part of the server farm enacts the 
illusion (I think) of intelligence? 



https://alwaysasking.com/when-will-ai-take-over/#What_is_Intelligence

According to the agent-environment interaction model of intelligence, something 
is intelligent if it:
“perceives its environment and interacts with it in a manner consistent with 
achieving a goal.”
This definition captures the full spectrum of intelligent behavior, regardless 
of how simple or complex it is. It includes creatures from worms to humans, and 
machines from thermostats to chess playing AIs.
Jason 




-Original Message-
From: Stathis Papaioannou 
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sun, Mar 12, 2023 9:29 pm
Subject: Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky



On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 at 12:18, Jason Resch  wrote:



On Sun, Mar 12, 2023, 8:57 PM Stathis Papaioannou  wrote:



On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 at 04:12, Lawrence Crowell 
 wrote:

Remember no matter haw complex an algorithm it is ultimately a lot of Boolean 
switching acting on what ever data is dumped into it.

That means that if the entity displays intelligent behaviour, Boolean switching 
acting on whatever data is dumped into it can generate intelligent behaviour.  



Boolean logic gates (and, or, not) are universal. There's no finitely 
describable behavior that can't be replicated by the repeated application of 
boolean logic gates paired with a memory.

Yes. But more generally, even from a position of ignorance, if you don’t 
believe that something made from electrical circuitry (or whatever) can display 
intelligent behaviour, and something made from electrical circuitry does in 
fact display intelligent behaviour, that means you were wrong.

-- 
Stathis Papaioannou-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAH%3D2ypXZLOOeKndehY1w3iseRPbrbF1HGG1dAk9rDh%3DvOtfVFA%40mail.gmail.com.
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/922538855.1640289.1678681763911%40mail.yahoo.com.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CA%2BBCJUjJt664RWY4as7etiAnPYZVVbmeHRwr9DnwQ-2S%2B2L1Nw%40mail.gmail.com.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/2053628493.1641995.1678683331640%40mail.yahoo.com.

Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky

2023-03-12 Thread spudboy100 via Everything List 
Physicist Sabine Hossenfelder also has a very nuanced view on mind and all 
that. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cP5zGh2fui0

She indicates that there is something akin to thought, IF I understand her? 


-Original Message-
From: Brent Meeker 
To: spudboy100 via Everything List 
Sent: Mon, Mar 13, 2023 12:45 am
Subject: Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky

 An operational test for intelligence requires that ability to act in the world 
to achieve goals.  LLM's are intelligent in that they act to satisfy prompts.  
If you went to the beach and you said to a crab, "Write in the sand a short 
poem about waves."  and the crab scratched out:
 
 Born
 of wind and
 earth's embrace
 an ocean's memory of
 storms  beyond the horizon
 its undulating information uselessly inscribed
 in the meandering sand
 finds voice at last
 its fall a sigh a
 single syllable
 of surf
 
 You'd think the crab was pretty smart.  An LLM could do that.  The only reason 
for us thinking it is not intelligent is that we know how the LLM does it.  
When I first took a class in AI fifty years ago at UCLA. The Professor 
explained that the definition of intelligence was "whatever computers can't do 
yet."
 
 Brent
 
 
 
 On 3/12/2023 9:29 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote:
  
 
Does it really display intelligent behavior, and now you will need to define 
intelligent behavior with testable parameters. Do humans display intelligent 
behavior? How often, and how consistently? Many say crows do. 
  This was part of my reason in hectoring JC on this. A neurobiologist tells, 
via research how parts of the human brain behave, and thus produce intelligence 
and (non-philosophically) consciousness. What part of the server farm enacts 
the illusion (I think) of intelligence? 
 
  
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Stathis Papaioannou 
 To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
 Sent: Sun, Mar 12, 2023 9:29 pm
 Subject: Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky
 
   
  
  On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 at 12:18, Jason Resch  wrote:
  
  
 
  On Sun, Mar 12, 2023, 8:57 PM Stathis Papaioannou  wrote:
  
  
  
  On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 at 04:12, Lawrence Crowell 
 wrote:
  
Remember no matter haw complex an algorithm it is ultimately a lot of Boolean 
switching acting on what ever data is dumped into it.
 
  That means that if the entity displays intelligent behaviour, Boolean 
switching acting on whatever data is dumped into it can generate intelligent 
behaviour.  
   
  
   
  Boolean logic gates (and, or, not) are universal. There's no finitely 
describable behavior that can't be replicated by the repeated application of 
boolean logic gates paired with a memory.  
 
  Yes. But more generally, even from a position of ignorance, if you don’t 
believe that something made from electrical circuitry (or whatever) can display 
intelligent behaviour, and something made from electrical circuitry does in 
fact display intelligent behaviour, that means you were wrong. 
 
   -- 
 Stathis Papaioannou -- 
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
 To view this discussion on the web visit  
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAH%3D2ypXZLOOeKndehY1w3iseRPbrbF1HGG1dAk9rDh%3DvOtfVFA%40mail.gmail.com
 .
-- 
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
 To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/922538855.1640289.1678681763911%40mail.yahoo.com.
 
 -- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/a38a6774-b5db-b940-d232-1d7f7aa5df3a%40gmail.com.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/117705.1625259.1678683006747%40mail.yahoo.com.

Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky

2023-03-12 Thread Brent Meeker 
An operational test for intelligence requires that ability to act in the 
world to achieve goals.  LLM's are intelligent in that they act to 
satisfy prompts.  If you went to the beach and you said to a crab, 
"Write in the sand a short poem about waves."  and the crab scratched out:


Born
of wind and
earth's embrace
an ocean's memory of
storms  beyond the horizon
its undulating information uselessly inscribed
in the meandering sand
finds voice at last
its fall a sigh a
single syllable
of surf

You'd think the crab was pretty smart.  An LLM could do that.  The only 
reason for us thinking it is not intelligent is that we know how the LLM 
does it.  When I first took a class in AI fifty years ago at UCLA. The 
Professor explained that the definition of intelligence was "whatever 
computers can't do yet."


Brent



On 3/12/2023 9:29 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote:
Does it really display intelligent behavior, and now you will need to 
define intelligent behavior with testable parameters. Do humans 
display intelligent behavior? How often, and how consistently? Many 
say crows do.


This was part of my reason in hectoring JC on this. A neurobiologist 
tells, via research how parts of the human brain behave, and thus 
produce intelligence and (non-philosophically) consciousness. What 
part of the server farm enacts the illusion (I think) of intelligence?





-Original Message-
From: Stathis Papaioannou 
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sun, Mar 12, 2023 9:29 pm
Subject: Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky



On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 at 12:18, Jason Resch  wrote:



On Sun, Mar 12, 2023, 8:57 PM Stathis Papaioannou
 wrote:



On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 at 04:12, Lawrence Crowell
 wrote:

Remember no matter haw complex an algorithm it is
ultimately a lot of Boolean switching acting on what ever
data is dumped into it.


That means that if the entity displays intelligent behaviour,
Boolean switching acting on whatever data is dumped into it
can generate intelligent behaviour.


Boolean logic gates (and, or, not) are universal. There's no
finitely describable behavior that can't be replicated by the
repeated application of boolean logic gates paired with a memory.


Yes. But more generally, even from a position of ignorance, if you 
don’t believe that something made from electrical circuitry (or 
whatever) can display intelligent behaviour, and something made from 
electrical circuitry does in fact display intelligent behaviour, that 
means you were wrong.


--
Stathis Papaioannou
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAH%3D2ypXZLOOeKndehY1w3iseRPbrbF1HGG1dAk9rDh%3DvOtfVFA%40mail.gmail.com 
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAH%3D2ypXZLOOeKndehY1w3iseRPbrbF1HGG1dAk9rDh%3DvOtfVFA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> 


.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/922538855.1640289.1678681763911%40mail.yahoo.com 
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/922538855.1640289.1678681763911%40mail.yahoo.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/a38a6774-b5db-b940-d232-1d7f7aa5df3a%40gmail.com.

Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky

2023-03-12 Thread Jason Resch 
On Mon, Mar 13, 2023, 12:29 AM spudboy100 via Everything List <
everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:

> Does it really display intelligent behavior, and now you will need to
> define intelligent behavior with testable parameters. Do humans display
> intelligent behavior? How often, and how consistently? Many say crows do.
>
> This was part of my reason in hectoring JC on this. A neurobiologist
> tells, via research how parts of the human brain behave, and thus produce
> intelligence and (non-philosophically) consciousness. What part of the
> server farm enacts the illusion (I think) of intelligence?
>
>
https://alwaysasking.com/when-will-ai-take-over/#What_is_Intelligence

According to the agent-environment interaction model of intelligence,
something is intelligent if it:

“perceives its environment and interacts with it in a manner consistent
with achieving a goal.”

This definition captures the full spectrum of intelligent behavior,
regardless of how simple or complex it is. It includes creatures from worms
to humans, and machines from thermostats to chess playing AIs.

Jason


>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Stathis Papaioannou 
> To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
> Sent: Sun, Mar 12, 2023 9:29 pm
> Subject: Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky
>
>
>
> On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 at 12:18, Jason Resch  wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 12, 2023, 8:57 PM Stathis Papaioannou 
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 at 04:12, Lawrence Crowell <
> goldenfieldquaterni...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Remember no matter haw complex an algorithm it is ultimately a lot of
> Boolean switching acting on what ever data is dumped into it.
>
>
> That means that if the entity displays intelligent behaviour, Boolean
> switching acting on whatever data is dumped into it can generate
> intelligent behaviour.
>
>
> Boolean logic gates (and, or, not) are universal. There's no finitely
> describable behavior that can't be replicated by the repeated application
> of boolean logic gates paired with a memory.
>
>
> Yes. But more generally, even from a position of ignorance, if you don’t
> believe that something made from electrical circuitry (or whatever) can
> display intelligent behaviour, and something made from electrical circuitry
> does in fact display intelligent behaviour, that means you were wrong.
>
> --
> Stathis Papaioannou
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
>
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAH%3D2ypXZLOOeKndehY1w3iseRPbrbF1HGG1dAk9rDh%3DvOtfVFA%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAH%3D2ypXZLOOeKndehY1w3iseRPbrbF1HGG1dAk9rDh%3DvOtfVFA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/922538855.1640289.1678681763911%40mail.yahoo.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/922538855.1640289.1678681763911%40mail.yahoo.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CA%2BBCJUjJt664RWY4as7etiAnPYZVVbmeHRwr9DnwQ-2S%2B2L1Nw%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky

2023-03-12 Thread spudboy100 via Everything List 
Does it really display intelligent behavior, and now you will need to define 
intelligent behavior with testable parameters. Do humans display intelligent 
behavior? How often, and how consistently? Many say crows do.
This was part of my reason in hectoring JC on this. A neurobiologist tells, via 
research how parts of the human brain behave, and thus produce intelligence and 
(non-philosophically) consciousness. What part of the server farm enacts the 
illusion (I think) of intelligence? 




-Original Message-
From: Stathis Papaioannou 
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sun, Mar 12, 2023 9:29 pm
Subject: Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky



On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 at 12:18, Jason Resch  wrote:



On Sun, Mar 12, 2023, 8:57 PM Stathis Papaioannou  wrote:



On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 at 04:12, Lawrence Crowell 
 wrote:

Remember no matter haw complex an algorithm it is ultimately a lot of Boolean 
switching acting on what ever data is dumped into it.

That means that if the entity displays intelligent behaviour, Boolean switching 
acting on whatever data is dumped into it can generate intelligent behaviour.  



Boolean logic gates (and, or, not) are universal. There's no finitely 
describable behavior that can't be replicated by the repeated application of 
boolean logic gates paired with a memory.

Yes. But more generally, even from a position of ignorance, if you don’t 
believe that something made from electrical circuitry (or whatever) can display 
intelligent behaviour, and something made from electrical circuitry does in 
fact display intelligent behaviour, that means you were wrong.

-- 
Stathis Papaioannou-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAH%3D2ypXZLOOeKndehY1w3iseRPbrbF1HGG1dAk9rDh%3DvOtfVFA%40mail.gmail.com.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/922538855.1640289.1678681763911%40mail.yahoo.com.

Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky

2023-03-12 Thread Stathis Papaioannou 
On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 at 12:18, Jason Resch  wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Mar 12, 2023, 8:57 PM Stathis Papaioannou 
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 at 04:12, Lawrence Crowell <
>> goldenfieldquaterni...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Remember no matter haw complex an algorithm it is ultimately a lot of
>>> Boolean switching acting on what ever data is dumped into it.
>>
>>
>> That means that if the entity displays intelligent behaviour, Boolean
>> switching acting on whatever data is dumped into it can generate
>> intelligent behaviour.
>>
>>
> Boolean logic gates (and, or, not) are universal. There's no finitely
> describable behavior that can't be replicated by the repeated application
> of boolean logic gates paired with a memory.
>

Yes. But more generally, even from a position of ignorance, if you don’t
believe that something made from electrical circuitry (or whatever) can
display intelligent behaviour, and something made from electrical circuitry
does in fact display intelligent behaviour, that means you were wrong.

> --
Stathis Papaioannou

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAH%3D2ypXZLOOeKndehY1w3iseRPbrbF1HGG1dAk9rDh%3DvOtfVFA%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky

2023-03-12 Thread Jason Resch 
On Sun, Mar 12, 2023, 1:12 PM Lawrence Crowell <
goldenfieldquaterni...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Remember no matter haw complex an algorithm it is ultimately a lot of
> Boolean switching acting on what ever data is dumped into it.
>
> LC
>

No matter how complex a human brain, it is ultimately the Dirac equation
acting on whatever particles are dumped into it.

Jason



>
> On Sunday, March 12, 2023 at 11:42:12 AM UTC-5 John Clark wrote:
>
>> The linguist Noam Chomsky wrote what in my opinion was a very foolish
>> article in the New York Times called "The False Promise of ChatGPT" in
>> which he tried to simultaneously make the case that a computer could never
>> do what ChatGPT can clearly already do, and that it wouldn't make any
>> difference even if it could, and that it could reach false conclusions if
>> it was fed false data (as if that wasn't also true for human beings), and
>> that it was terrible that it didn't give its personal opinion on moral
>> issues even though Chomsky would certainly criticize it even more if it did
>> take such a stand.  ChatGPT reads everything so somebody asked Sydney what
>> him what he thought about Chomsky's article and I think the machine  gave a
>> pretty good rebuttal:
>>
>> ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky
>> <https://twitter.com/SebastienBubeck/status/1634009568341622784>
>>
>> Quantum computer expert Scott Aaronson also has some interesting things
>> to say about this:
>>
>> The false promise of Chomskyism <https://scottaaronson.blog/>
>>
>> John K ClarkSee what's on my new list at  Extropolis
>> <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>
>>
>> 5te
>>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/907f2e65-1214-4d88-838a-4d6e049459cbn%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/907f2e65-1214-4d88-838a-4d6e049459cbn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CA%2BBCJUhnHJOCgzO%2B9Qr5TbehGrPs8yLC6zy2EaJzB447w7Op8A%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky

2023-03-12 Thread Jason Resch 
On Sun, Mar 12, 2023, 8:57 PM Stathis Papaioannou 
wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 at 04:12, Lawrence Crowell <
> goldenfieldquaterni...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Remember no matter haw complex an algorithm it is ultimately a lot of
>> Boolean switching acting on what ever data is dumped into it.
>
>
> That means that if the entity displays intelligent behaviour, Boolean
> switching acting on whatever data is dumped into it can generate
> intelligent behaviour.
>
>
Boolean logic gates (and, or, not) are universal. There's no finitely
describable behavior that can't be replicated by the repeated application
of boolean logic gates paired with a memory.

Jason



> --
> Stathis Papaioannou
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAH%3D2ypUxSKohgzu8ERuajLjFuvsDHDWDFPJmgNc09ZjHx%3DwP0Q%40mail.gmail.com
> 
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CA%2BBCJUi5Hc6onGe-p5XBXWNq93PSftgiO6dRtMhd0eKYYoz6Lg%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky

2023-03-12 Thread Stathis Papaioannou 
On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 at 04:12, Lawrence Crowell <
goldenfieldquaterni...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Remember no matter haw complex an algorithm it is ultimately a lot of
> Boolean switching acting on what ever data is dumped into it.


That means that if the entity displays intelligent behaviour, Boolean
switching acting on whatever data is dumped into it can generate
intelligent behaviour.


-- 
Stathis Papaioannou

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAH%3D2ypUxSKohgzu8ERuajLjFuvsDHDWDFPJmgNc09ZjHx%3DwP0Q%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky

2023-03-12 Thread John Clark 
On Sun, Mar 12, 2023 at 1:12 PM Lawrence Crowell <
goldenfieldquaterni...@gmail.com> wrote:

*> Remember no matter haw complex an algorithm it is ultimately a lot of
> Boolean switching acting on what ever data is dumped into it.*


Yes but I see no evidence that the same thing couldn't be said about the
human brain.

John K Clark





>
> LC
>
> On Sunday, March 12, 2023 at 11:42:12 AM UTC-5 John Clark wrote:
>
>> The linguist Noam Chomsky wrote what in my opinion was a very foolish
>> article in the New York Times called "The False Promise of ChatGPT" in
>> which he tried to simultaneously make the case that a computer could never
>> do what ChatGPT can clearly already do, and that it wouldn't make any
>> difference even if it could, and that it could reach false conclusions if
>> it was fed false data (as if that wasn't also true for human beings), and
>> that it was terrible that it didn't give its personal opinion on moral
>> issues even though Chomsky would certainly criticize it even more if it did
>> take such a stand.  ChatGPT reads everything so somebody asked Sydney what
>> him what he thought about Chomsky's article and I think the machine  gave a
>> pretty good rebuttal:
>>
>> ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky
>> <https://twitter.com/SebastienBubeck/status/1634009568341622784>
>>
>> Quantum computer expert Scott Aaronson also has some interesting things
>> to say about this:
>>
>> The false promise of Chomskyism <https://scottaaronson.blog/>
>>
>> John K ClarkSee what's on my new list at  Extropolis
>> <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>
>>
>> 5te
>>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/907f2e65-1214-4d88-838a-4d6e049459cbn%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/907f2e65-1214-4d88-838a-4d6e049459cbn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv3a39%3DKrjj1u91%3DJ0bnQsmyEK_SQsw5d3f2BTpSO7udhg%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky

2023-03-12 Thread Lawrence Crowell 
Remember no matter haw complex an algorithm it is ultimately a lot of 
Boolean switching acting on what ever data is dumped into it.

LC

On Sunday, March 12, 2023 at 11:42:12 AM UTC-5 John Clark wrote:

> The linguist Noam Chomsky wrote what in my opinion was a very foolish 
> article in the New York Times called "The False Promise of ChatGPT" in 
> which he tried to simultaneously make the case that a computer could never 
> do what ChatGPT can clearly already do, and that it wouldn't make any 
> difference even if it could, and that it could reach false conclusions if 
> it was fed false data (as if that wasn't also true for human beings), and 
> that it was terrible that it didn't give its personal opinion on moral 
> issues even though Chomsky would certainly criticize it even more if it did 
> take such a stand.  ChatGPT reads everything so somebody asked Sydney what 
> him what he thought about Chomsky's article and I think the machine  gave a 
> pretty good rebuttal: 
>
> ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky 
> <https://twitter.com/SebastienBubeck/status/1634009568341622784>
>
> Quantum computer expert Scott Aaronson also has some interesting things 
> to say about this:
>
> The false promise of Chomskyism <https://scottaaronson.blog/>
>
> John K ClarkSee what's on my new list at  Extropolis 
> <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>
>
> 5te
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/907f2e65-1214-4d88-838a-4d6e049459cbn%40googlegroups.com.

ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky

2023-03-12 Thread John Clark 
The linguist Noam Chomsky wrote what in my opinion was a very foolish
article in the New York Times called "The False Promise of ChatGPT" in
which he tried to simultaneously make the case that a computer could never
do what ChatGPT can clearly already do, and that it wouldn't make any
difference even if it could, and that it could reach false conclusions if
it was fed false data (as if that wasn't also true for human beings), and
that it was terrible that it didn't give its personal opinion on moral
issues even though Chomsky would certainly criticize it even more if it did
take such a stand.  ChatGPT reads everything so somebody asked Sydney what
him what he thought about Chomsky's article and I think the machine  gave a
pretty good rebuttal:

ChatGPT's rebuttal to Chomsky
<https://twitter.com/SebastienBubeck/status/1634009568341622784>

Quantum computer expert Scott Aaronson also has some interesting things to
say about this:

The false promise of Chomskyism <https://scottaaronson.blog/>

John K ClarkSee what's on my new list at  Extropolis
<https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>

5te

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv3tqi93Aj2LF%2Bc7yS9WUfnXUBSHjDCH5S4wY1TbvsFk2g%40mail.gmail.com.