RE: [agi] An AGI Test/Prize

2007-10-22 Thread John G. Rose
Vladimir, I'm using system as kind of a general word for a set and operator(s). You are understanding it correctly except templates is not right. The templates are actually a vast internal complex of structure which includes morphisms which are like templates. But you are right it does

Re: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses]

2007-10-22 Thread Russell Wallace
On 10/23/07, J Storrs Hall, PhD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You can DO them consciously but that doesn't necessarily mean that you can > intentionally become conscious of the ones you are doing unconsciously. One every few seconds happens involuntarily, when I try to not let any through at all; b

Re: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses]

2007-10-22 Thread J Storrs Hall, PhD
You can DO them consciously but that doesn't necessarily mean that you can intentionally become conscious of the ones you are doing unconsciously. Try cutting a hole in a piece of paper and moving it smoothly across another page that has text on it. When your eye tracks the smoothly moving page,

Re: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses]

2007-10-22 Thread Russell Wallace
On 10/23/07, J Storrs Hall, PhD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Still don't buy it. Saccades are normally well below the conscious level, and > a vast majority of what goes on cognitively is not available to > introspection. Any good reader gets to the point where the sentence meanings, > not the word

Re: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses]

2007-10-22 Thread J Storrs Hall, PhD
On Monday 22 October 2007 09:33:24 pm, Edward W. Porter wrote: > Richard, ... > Are you capable of understanding how that might be considered insulting? I think in all seriousness that he literally cannot understand. Richard's emotional interaction is very similar to that of some autistic people

Re: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses]

2007-10-22 Thread J Storrs Hall, PhD
On Monday 22 October 2007 08:48:20 pm, Russell Wallace wrote: > On 10/23/07, J Storrs Hall, PhD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Still don't buy it. What the article amounts to is that "speed-reading" is > > fake. No kind of recognition beyond skimming (e.g. just ignoring a > > substantial proportion

Re: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses]

2007-10-22 Thread J Storrs Hall, PhD
On Monday 22 October 2007 08:01:55 pm, Richard Loosemore wrote: > Did you ever try to parse a sentence with more than one noun in it? > > Well, all right: but please be assured that the rest of us do in fact > do that. "Why make insulting personal remarkss instead of explaining your reasoning?

Re: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses]

2007-10-22 Thread Russell Wallace
On 10/23/07, J Storrs Hall, PhD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Still don't buy it. What the article amounts to is that "speed-reading" is > fake. No kind of recognition beyond skimming (e.g. just ignoring a > substantial proportion of the text) is called for to explain the observed > performance. An

Re: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses]

2007-10-22 Thread Richard Loosemore
Edward W. Porter wrote: Richard, I will only respond to the below copied one of the questions in your last message because of lack of time. I pick this example because it was so “DEEP” (to be heard in your mind with max reverb). I hoped that if I could give a halfway reasonable answer to i

Re: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses]

2007-10-22 Thread Richard Loosemore
J Storrs Hall, PhD wrote: On Monday 22 October 2007 02:54:53 pm, Richard Loosemore wrote: the question is how it can represent multiple copies of a concept that occur in a situation without getting confused about which is which. If the appearance of one chair in a scene causes the [chair] n

Re: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses]

2007-10-22 Thread J Storrs Hall, PhD
On Monday 22 October 2007 06:02:17 pm, Russell Wallace wrote: > On 10/22/07, J Storrs Hall, PhD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I don't buy that there is parallel recognition going on. > > But that's not what the evidence you cited supports. > > The evidence you cited weighs against the _comprehen

Re: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses]

2007-10-22 Thread Russell Wallace
On 10/22/07, J Storrs Hall, PhD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't buy that there is parallel recognition going on. But that's not what the evidence you cited supports. The evidence you cited weighs against the _comprehension_ claims of speed-reading practitioners. That's fine, but I'm not defe

Re: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses]

2007-10-22 Thread J Storrs Hall, PhD
On Monday 22 October 2007 03:35:33 pm, Russell Wallace wrote: > On 10/22/07, J Storrs Hall, PhD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Attention -- fovea -- saccade -- serial -- chunking -- frame. > > > > Those higher functions have to be there anyway. Is there any evidence that we > > can recognize multi

RE: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses]

2007-10-22 Thread Edward W. Porter
Richard, I will only respond to the below copied one of the questions in your last message because of lack of time. I pick this example because it was so “DEEP” (to be heard in your mind with max reverb). I hoped that if I could give a halfway reasonable answer to it and if, just maybe, you cou

Re: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses]

2007-10-22 Thread Vladimir Nesov
Richard, Structure, instances and temporary relations can be represented by uniform elements through activation set. I'm sure it's addressed in theory of Hebbian learning somewhere, and I'd be grateful if someone could provide a reference for description of this process. I tried to describe it (ad

Re: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses]

2007-10-22 Thread Russell Wallace
On 10/22/07, J Storrs Hall, PhD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Attention -- fovea -- saccade -- serial -- chunking -- frame. > > Those higher functions have to be there anyway. Is there any evidence that we > can recognize multiple primitives simultaneously? Yes. Speed-reading in particular, deliber

Re: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses]

2007-10-22 Thread J Storrs Hall, PhD
On Monday 22 October 2007 02:54:53 pm, Richard Loosemore wrote: > the question is how it can represent multiple > copies of a concept that occur in a situation without getting confused > about which is which. If the appearance of one chair in a scene causes > the [chair] neuron (or neurons, i

Re: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses]

2007-10-22 Thread Richard Loosemore
Edward W. Porter wrote: Dear Readers of the RE: Bogus Neuroscience Thread, Because I am the one responsible for bringing to the attention of this list the Granger article (“Engines of the brain: The computational instruction set of human cognition”, by Richard Granger) that has caused the rec

RE: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses]

2007-10-22 Thread Edward W. Porter
The below message was to Richard Granger at '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'. I didn't realize the original address would be lost in the copy I cc'ed to this list. Ed Porter -Original Message- From: Edward W. Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 2:00 PM To: agi@v2.listbox.c

RE: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses]

2007-10-22 Thread Edward W. Porter
BEN>> My hypothesis is that when the nodes in a cluster are activated, this then leads to the recruitment of other associated nodes not in the cluster, into a contextually-appropriate transient assembly ... and that much of what's interesting in cognitive neurodynamics has to do with these trans

Re: [agi] Re: Bogus Neuroscience

2007-10-22 Thread Richard Loosemore
Benjamin Goertzel wrote: But each of these things has a huge raft of assumptions built into it: -- hierarchical clustering ... OF WHAT KIND OF SYMBOLS? -- hash coding ... OF WHAT KIND OF SYMBOLS? -- sequence completion ... OF WHAT KIND OF SYMBOLS? In each case, Grange

FW: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses]

2007-10-22 Thread Edward W. Porter
Richard, You might be interested to know how much attention one of your articles has gotten in the agi@v2.listbox.com mailing list under the RE: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses thread, which has been dedicated to it. Below is a me

Re: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses]

2007-10-22 Thread Benjamin Goertzel
> > As I said above, it leaves many things unsaid and unclear. For example, > does it activate all or multiple nodes in a cluster together or not? Does > it always activate the most general cluster covering a given pattern, or > does it use some measure of how well a cluster fits input to select

RE: Bogus Neuroscience [WAS Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses]

2007-10-22 Thread Edward W. Porter
Dear Readers of the RE: Bogus Neuroscience Thread, Because I am the one responsible for bringing to the attention of this list the Granger article (“Engines of the brain: The computational instruction set of human cognition”, by Richard Granger) that has caused the recent kerfuffle, this morning

Re: [agi] Re: Bogus Neuroscience

2007-10-22 Thread Benjamin Goertzel
On 10/22/07, Mark Waser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think we've beaten this horse to death . . . . :-) > > >> However, he has some interesting ideas about the connections between > cognitive primitives and neurological structures/dynamics. Connections of > this nature are IMO "cog sci" r

Re: [agi] Re: Bogus Neuroscience

2007-10-22 Thread Benjamin Goertzel
> > > But each of these things has a huge raft of assumptions built into it: > > -- hierarchical clustering ... OF WHAT KIND OF SYMBOLS? > -- hash coding ... OF WHAT KIND OF SYMBOLS? > -- sequence completion ... OF WHAT KIND OF SYMBOLS? > > In each case, Granger's answer is that the symbols a

Re: [agi] Re: Bogus Neuroscience

2007-10-22 Thread Mark Waser
I think we've beaten this horse to death . . . . :-) >> However, he has some interesting ideas about the connections between >> cognitive primitives and neurological structures/dynamics. Connections of >> this nature are IMO "cog sci" rather than just "neurosci." At least, that >> is cons

Re: [agi] Re: Bogus Neuroscience

2007-10-22 Thread Richard Loosemore
Benjamin Goertzel wrote: On 10/22/07, *Mark Waser* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > -- I think Granger's cog-sci speculations, while oversimplified and surely wrong in parts, contain important hints at the truth (and in my prior email I tried to indicate

RE: [agi] An AGI Test/Prize

2007-10-22 Thread John G. Rose
Yeah I'm not really agreeing with you here. I feel that, though I haven't really studied other cognitive software structures, but I feel that they can built simpler and more efficient. But I shouldn't come out saying that unless I attack some of the details right? But that's a gut reaction I have a

Re: [agi] Re: Bogus Neuroscience

2007-10-22 Thread Benjamin Goertzel
> > > Granger has nothing new in cog sci except some of the particular details > in b) -- which you find "uncompelling and oversimplified" -- so what is the > cog sci that you find of value? > -- > Apparently we are using "cog sci" in slightly different ways... I agre

Re: [agi] Re: Bogus Neuroscience

2007-10-22 Thread Mark Waser
>> So, one way to summarize my view of the paper is >> -- The neuroscience part of Granger's paper tells how these >> library-functions may be implemented in the brain >> -- The cog-sci part consists partly of >> - a) the hypothesis that these library-functions are available to >> cognitive p

Re: [agi] Re: Bogus Neuroscience

2007-10-22 Thread Benjamin Goertzel
On 10/22/07, Mark Waser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> -- I think Granger's cog-sci speculations, while oversimplified and > surely wrong in parts, contain important hints at the truth (and in my prior > email I tried to indicate how) > >> -- Richard OTOH, seems to consider Granger's cog-sci sp

Re: [agi] Re: Bogus Neuroscience

2007-10-22 Thread Benjamin Goertzel
> > > About the Granger paper, I thought last night of a concise summary of > how bad it really is. Imagine that we had not invented computers, but > we were suddenly given a batch of computers by some aliens, and we tried > to put together a science to understand how these machines worked. > > Su

Re: [agi] An AGI Test/Prize

2007-10-22 Thread Richard Loosemore
Benjamin Goertzel wrote: On 10/22/07, *J Storrs Hall, PhD* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: On Monday 22 October 2007 08:05:26 am, Benjamin Goertzel wrote: > ... but dynamic long-term memory, in my view, is a wildly > self-organizing mess, and would best be

Re: [agi] Re: Bogus Neuroscience [...]

2007-10-22 Thread Mark Waser
Arthur, There was no censorship. We all saw that message go by. We all just ignored it. Take a hint. - Original Message - From: "A. T. Murray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 10:35 AM Subject: [agi] Re: Bogus Neuroscience [...] On Oct 21, 2007, at 6:4

Re: [agi] Re: Bogus Neuroscience

2007-10-22 Thread Mark Waser
>> -- I think Granger's cog-sci speculations, while oversimplified and surely >> wrong in parts, contain important hints at the truth (and in my prior email >> I tried to indicate how) >> -- Richard OTOH, seems to consider Granger's cog-sci speculations total >> "garbage" >> This is a significa

RE: [agi] An AGI Test/Prize

2007-10-22 Thread John G. Rose
> Holy writhing Mandelbrot sets, Batman! > > Why real and non-division? I particularly don't like real -- my computer > can't > handle the precision :-) Robin - forget all this digital stuff it's a trap, we need some analog nano-computers to help fight these crispy impostors! John - This l

Re: [agi] Re: Bogus Neuroscience

2007-10-22 Thread Richard Loosemore
Mark Waser wrote: >> True enough, but Granger's work is NOT total BS... just partial BS ;-) In which case, clearly praise the good stuff but just as clearly (or even more so) oppose the BS. You and Richard seem to be in vehement agreement. Granger knows his neurology and probably his neuros

Re: [agi] An AGI Test/Prize

2007-10-22 Thread Benjamin Goertzel
On 10/22/07, J Storrs Hall, PhD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Monday 22 October 2007 08:05:26 am, Benjamin Goertzel wrote: > > ... but dynamic long-term memory, in my view, is a wildly > > self-organizing mess, and would best be modeled algebraically as a > quadratic > > iteration over a high-d

[agi] Re: Bogus Neuroscience [...]

2007-10-22 Thread A. T. Murray
On Oct 21, 2007, at 6:47 PM, J. Andrew Rogers wote: > >On Oct 21, 2007, at 6:37 PM, Richard Loosemore wrote: >> It took me at least five years of struggle to get to the point >> where I could start to have the confidence to call a spade a spade > > >It still looks like a shovel to me. > In what l

Re: [agi] An AGI Test/Prize

2007-10-22 Thread J Storrs Hall, PhD
On Monday 22 October 2007 08:05:26 am, Benjamin Goertzel wrote: > ... but dynamic long-term memory, in my view, is a wildly > self-organizing mess, and would best be modeled algebraically as a quadratic > iteration over a high-dimensional real non-division algebra whose > multiplication table is ev

Re: [agi] Re: Bogus Neuroscience

2007-10-22 Thread Benjamin Goertzel
> > And I really am not seeing any difference between what I understand as > your opinion and what I understand as his. > Sorry if I seemed to be "hammering" on anyone, it wasn't my intention. (Yesterday was a sort of bad day for me for non-science-related reasons, so my tone of e-voice was like

Re: [agi] Re: Bogus Neuroscience

2007-10-22 Thread Mark Waser
>> True enough, but Granger's work is NOT total BS... just partial BS ;-) In which case, clearly praise the good stuff but just as clearly (or even more so) oppose the BS. You and Richard seem to be in vehement agreement. Granger knows his neurology and probably his neuroscience (depending upo

Re: [agi] An AGI Test/Prize

2007-10-22 Thread Benjamin Goertzel
Hmmm... I have a feeling that real cognitive structures are by and large way messier than the abstract algebras dealt with in research papers, though... so I'm not sure how far the algebras handled in the research literature will get you, in terms of approaching AGI Perception and motorics wil

Re: [agi] Re: Bogus Neuroscience

2007-10-22 Thread Benjamin Goertzel
On 10/22/07, Mark Waser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > If I see garbage being peddled as if it were science, I will call it > > garbage. > > Amen. The "political correctness" of forgiving people for espousing total > BS is the primary cause of many egregious things going on for far, *far* > too

RE: [agi] An AGI Test/Prize

2007-10-22 Thread John G. Rose
Ben, That is sort of a neat kind of device. Will have to think about that as it is fairly dynamic I may have to look that one up and potentially experiment on it. The kinds of algebraic structures I'm talking about basically are as many as possible. Also things like sets w/o operators, and

[agi] Re: Bogus Neuroscience

2007-10-22 Thread Mark Waser
If I see garbage being peddled as if it were science, I will call it garbage. Amen. The "political correctness" of forgiving people for espousing total BS is the primary cause of many egregious things going on for far, *far* too long. - This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri

Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses

2007-10-22 Thread Mike Tintner
RW:As I understand it, this is not the case.Tests of throwing accuracy have put chimpanzees' typical error in feet in the same ballpark as humans' typical error in inches. (Some of this is mechanical - the arrangement of bones and muscles in the human arm trades off some strength for accuracy -