Re: [agi] whats computer vision anyway

[John Rose]

On Monday, September 16, 2019, at 12:11 PM, rouncer81 wrote:
> yes variables are simple and old,  we dont need them anymore.

Sorry, object names :) In some languages everything is an object.

The thought was going in the direction of reverse obfuscation...opposite 
direction of minification.   Comprende?

John

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/Ta9ef92db7ce9c030-Meb77c6d30387d9dea099a9cd
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] whats computer vision anyway

[rouncer81]

yes variables are simple and old,  we dont need them anymore.
--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/Ta9ef92db7ce9c030-M295d5f2c11c08ac3f6a15829
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] whats computer vision anyway

[Stefan Reich via AGI]

It was a joke... :)

On Sun, 15 Sep 2019 at 01:08, John Rose  wrote:

> On Saturday, September 14, 2019, at 6:19 PM, Stefan Reich wrote:
>
> Yeah, I'm sure I should increase my use of Latin variable names.
>
>
> I mean... maybe but.
>
> When you run an obfuscator or minifier on code what does it do? Removes
> human readable. Minifier minimizes representation. But variable names,
> method names, etc. are largely un-innovated like I was saying. Huge
> opportunity there. It's an abstraction on top of code that is uncoupled to
> the code but coupled to the coder.
>
> John
>
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  + delivery
> options  Permalink
> 
>


-- 
Stefan Reich
BotCompany.de // Java-based operating systems

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/Ta9ef92db7ce9c030-Me1af1de7209c11b31a9af0f9
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] whats computer vision anyway

[John Rose]

On Saturday, September 14, 2019, at 6:19 PM, Stefan Reich wrote:
> Yeah, I'm sure I should increase my use of Latin variable names.

I mean... maybe but.

When you run an obfuscator or minifier on code what does it do? Removes human 
readable. Minifier minimizes representation. But variable names, method names, 
etc. are largely un-innovated like I was saying. Huge opportunity there. It's 
an abstraction on top of code that is uncoupled to the code but coupled to the 
coder.

John

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/Ta9ef92db7ce9c030-M451466d707fa1361bf9892ed
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] whats computer vision anyway

[Stefan Reich via AGI]

Yeah, I'm sure I should increase my use of Latin variable names.

On Sat, 14 Sep 2019 at 23:25, John Rose  wrote:

> On Wednesday, September 11, 2019, at 8:43 AM, Stefan Reich wrote:
>
> With you, I see zero innovation. No new use case solved, nothing, over the
> past, what, 2 years? No forays into anything other than text (vision,
> auditory, whatever)?
>
>
> Actually, Mentifex did contribute something incredibly bold and unique
> recently. Latin.
>
> What is one of the most un-innovated pieces of computer programming?
>
> Ans: Variable names.
>
> Just think how you can spice things up with a little Latin action going on
> there :)
>
> John
>
>
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  + delivery
> options  Permalink
> 
>


-- 
Stefan Reich
BotCompany.de // Java-based operating systems

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/Ta9ef92db7ce9c030-Me26251de574e72d7fbf41812
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] whats computer vision anyway

[John Rose]

On Wednesday, September 11, 2019, at 8:43 AM, Stefan Reich wrote:
> With you, I see zero innovation. No new use case solved, nothing, over the 
> past, what, 2 years? No forays into anything other than text (vision, 
> auditory, whatever)?
> 

Actually, Mentifex did contribute something incredibly bold and unique 
recently. Latin.

What is one of the most un-innovated pieces of computer programming?

Ans: Variable names.

Just think how you can spice things up with a little Latin action going on 
there :)

John


--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/Ta9ef92db7ce9c030-Md2ccf179a7f4c1871f93638a
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] whats computer vision anyway

[rouncer81]

3d depth generation from 2d video.  <1 million dolara.  but 0c if you know how 
to do it.

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/Ta9ef92db7ce9c030-M8ba9f0c11a7b2ceaacaf7298
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] whats computer vision anyway

[Stefan Reich via AGI]

Yeah but in all reality, your AI project isn't going anywhere, Mentifex.

Granted, my progress is also hampered by poverty and such, but I do have
something to show and loads of ideas up my sleeve.

With you, I see zero innovation. No new use case solved, nothing, over the
past, what, 2 years? No forays into anything other than text (vision,
auditory, whatever)?

Be a little realistic. I don't hate you, but man it is painful to see
someone claim something that is not real.

On Tue, 10 Sep 2019 at 22:53, A.T. Murray  wrote:

> From the Mentifex Autobiography (link at bottom):
>
> "In the mail that year I received a subscription copy of an issue of
> Scientific American devoted totally to the human brain. One of the authors,
> Dr. David Hubel at Harvard, had written both the foreword and one of the
> major articles, so I figured that this scientist named Hubel was the most
> worthy to receive a copy of my paper, and I mailed it to him at Harvard
> University. I also mailed a copy of it to my scientific hero in
> Switzerland, the Nobelist Sir John Carew Eccles. Months later, Dr. Hubel at
> Harvard wrote back to me that "neural modeling" was not his specialty, and
> so I should send the paper to either David Marr or Tomaso Poggio. I looked
> both of them up in the university library, and it seemed that David Marr
> had done the more important work in the field of vision, so I mailed the
> paper to Marr, who eventually wrote back -- from his deathbed -- that I
> should send the paper to a certain AI researcher at the Massachusetts
> Institute of Technology and not expect an answer but still send the paper.
> I did not bother to send the paper, and anyway that researcher was
> eventually implicated in a major scandal. On the other hand, one day about
> eight months after the mailing of the paper to Switzerland, I was
> absolutely shocked to receive an airmail letter from the Nobelist in
> neuroscience Sir John Carew Eccles. It was so amazing to me to have that
> letter in my hand, that at first I could not open it. I just sat in an
> armchair and stared at the letter from Eccles for ten or twenty or thirty
> minutes, while my mind was racing with a brainstorm of thoughts of what it
> would mean to now be in touch with arguably the world's foremost authority
> on the human brain. When I finally did open the letter, I was flattered to
> read that Sir Eccles thought that I was making a serious contribution. He
> suggested that I send the paper to a certain researcher in New York, but I
> never did."
>
> "A few years later, Dr. David Hubel shared a Nobel prize for his work
> explaining the human visual system. Since I had now heard from two
> Nobelists in neuroscience who took me seriously, I became impervious to the
> slings and arrows of Mentifex-bashers who hounded and vilified me on the
> Internet. The bashing took very strange and unusual forms, though. I
> gradually discovered that in every AI-related newsgroup (discussion forum)
> on Usenet, there was always at least one individual who considered himself
> something like "the king of the hill," or the resident authority on the
> subject matter. These lords of the flies did not like me coming in and
> making my ESC (Extraordinary Scientific Claim) that I was creating True AI
> or Strong AI or Artificial General Intelligence or whatever the
> nomenclature was. Since I believed in my theory of mind, I also believed
> very strongly in the AI software that I was trying to write. But the more I
> tried to communicate my results, the more I was taken for some kind of
> nutcase who was not only wrong but was absolutely convinced that he was
> right. One netgod of Usenet wrote the very first Mentifex FAQ or
> "Frequently Asked Questions" about Mentifex. Other Netizens started doing
> things like putting an anti-Mentifex statement in the "SIG" or "signature"
> block below their Usenet posts. Or they would e-mail me and ask me
> something, then go on anti-Mentifex vendettas for years. I discovered that
> the film director who made Saving Private Ryan had suffered a similar fate
> at the start of his career when he was just one of the guys at a movie
> studio and his co-workers deeply resented both his efforts to rise above
> them and his success in rising above them. Luckily for me, I actually
> enjoyed writing the AI software and getting it to work better and better."
>
> http://ai.neocities.org/mylife33.html -- My Life at Age Thirty-Three
>
> http://ai.neocities.org/VisRecog.html -- Visual Recognition Module
>
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  + delivery
> options  Permalink
> 
>


-- 
Stefan Reich
BotCompany.de // Java-based operating systems

--

Re: [agi] whats computer vision anyway

[rouncer81]

Good luck to that dude,  I hope he makes it.
Thats a good idea with "I see BIRD" said when it sees a bird, so it can link 
its eye to its ear...   I think thats important.   But probably more useful if 
it was the birds call, to the birds feathers,  rather than spoken "bird" to the 
picture.

But I guess,   anything could be important in the great sea of the idea of 
intelligence - I cannot judge.


--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/Ta9ef92db7ce9c030-M80dc0b83a18f4b53c64a9f2b
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Re: [agi] whats computer vision anyway

[A.T. Murray]

>From the Mentifex Autobiography (link at bottom):

"In the mail that year I received a subscription copy of an issue of
Scientific American devoted totally to the human brain. One of the authors,
Dr. David Hubel at Harvard, had written both the foreword and one of the
major articles, so I figured that this scientist named Hubel was the most
worthy to receive a copy of my paper, and I mailed it to him at Harvard
University. I also mailed a copy of it to my scientific hero in
Switzerland, the Nobelist Sir John Carew Eccles. Months later, Dr. Hubel at
Harvard wrote back to me that "neural modeling" was not his specialty, and
so I should send the paper to either David Marr or Tomaso Poggio. I looked
both of them up in the university library, and it seemed that David Marr
had done the more important work in the field of vision, so I mailed the
paper to Marr, who eventually wrote back -- from his deathbed -- that I
should send the paper to a certain AI researcher at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology and not expect an answer but still send the paper.
I did not bother to send the paper, and anyway that researcher was
eventually implicated in a major scandal. On the other hand, one day about
eight months after the mailing of the paper to Switzerland, I was
absolutely shocked to receive an airmail letter from the Nobelist in
neuroscience Sir John Carew Eccles. It was so amazing to me to have that
letter in my hand, that at first I could not open it. I just sat in an
armchair and stared at the letter from Eccles for ten or twenty or thirty
minutes, while my mind was racing with a brainstorm of thoughts of what it
would mean to now be in touch with arguably the world's foremost authority
on the human brain. When I finally did open the letter, I was flattered to
read that Sir Eccles thought that I was making a serious contribution. He
suggested that I send the paper to a certain researcher in New York, but I
never did."

"A few years later, Dr. David Hubel shared a Nobel prize for his work
explaining the human visual system. Since I had now heard from two
Nobelists in neuroscience who took me seriously, I became impervious to the
slings and arrows of Mentifex-bashers who hounded and vilified me on the
Internet. The bashing took very strange and unusual forms, though. I
gradually discovered that in every AI-related newsgroup (discussion forum)
on Usenet, there was always at least one individual who considered himself
something like "the king of the hill," or the resident authority on the
subject matter. These lords of the flies did not like me coming in and
making my ESC (Extraordinary Scientific Claim) that I was creating True AI
or Strong AI or Artificial General Intelligence or whatever the
nomenclature was. Since I believed in my theory of mind, I also believed
very strongly in the AI software that I was trying to write. But the more I
tried to communicate my results, the more I was taken for some kind of
nutcase who was not only wrong but was absolutely convinced that he was
right. One netgod of Usenet wrote the very first Mentifex FAQ or
"Frequently Asked Questions" about Mentifex. Other Netizens started doing
things like putting an anti-Mentifex statement in the "SIG" or "signature"
block below their Usenet posts. Or they would e-mail me and ask me
something, then go on anti-Mentifex vendettas for years. I discovered that
the film director who made Saving Private Ryan had suffered a similar fate
at the start of his career when he was just one of the guys at a movie
studio and his co-workers deeply resented both his efforts to rise above
them and his success in rising above them. Luckily for me, I actually
enjoyed writing the AI software and getting it to work better and better."

http://ai.neocities.org/mylife33.html -- My Life at Age Thirty-Three

http://ai.neocities.org/VisRecog.html -- Visual Recognition Module

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/Ta9ef92db7ce9c030-M798fa7f9f1e2653c5ed9b320
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

[agi] whats computer vision anyway

[rouncer81]

More brainy give aways - Thanks everyone here for the TIPS!

What if a computer vision system, is just detecting events.
And its not learning anything.
It has 1 condition, per event, in its finite little brain system.
But you give a man a length of video, and he comes back shaking his head its 
too hard.
Would 3d do any better? How about turning everything into 3d stickmen.
Now maybe its easier to have basic conditional measurements be more accurate to 
activate events?
But then what kind of context do you need to detect these events appropriately.

lets look at some examples.

If I wanted to tell if someone was jumping, id detect if feet arent touching 
the ground.
If someone is going to score a goal - He would be lowering in proximity. (But 
that would take looking over time maybe.)
If someone was getting punched, Id detect a fist in close proximity to a head.

I could then relate these events to the pattern store and give it more 
functionality, and the patterns could predict what events are coming up in the 
future. But I think the best way to do it,  is if its playing monkey ball - 
write the states it needs to play it properly, then just pretend all the humans 
playing are it.

So its a boolean model,  detecting off the camera.
--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/Ta9ef92db7ce9c030-M381c4b3a7780cb22f717e105
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription