Matt Mahoney wrote:
--- "John G. Rose" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From: Matt Mahoney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
What are the best current examples of (to any extent) self-building
software
?
So far, most of the effort has been concentrated on acquiring the
necessary
computing power. http://e
esday, November 28, 2007 3:09 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research]
Matt Mahoney wrote:
> --- "John G. Rose" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>> From: Matt Mahoney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>
> From: Richard Loosemore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> I can answer this for you, because I was once an anti-virus developer,
> so I have seen the internal code of more viruses than I care to think
> about.
>
> The answer is NO. Malicious hackers are among the world's most stupid
> programmers.
Ed Porter wrote:
Richard,
Since hacking is a fairly big, organized crime supported, business in
eastern Europe and Russia, since the potential rewards for it relative to
most jobs in those countries can be huge, and since Russia has a tradition
of excellence in math and science, I would be very
Message-
From: Richard Loosemore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 4:51 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research]
Ed Porter wrote:
> Richard,
>
> Since hacking is a fairly big, organized crime
Ed Porter wrote:
Richard,
To the uninformed like me, can you explain why it would be so easy for an
intelligent person to cause great harm on the net. What are the major
weaknesses of the architectures of virtually all operating systems that
allow this. It is just lots of little bugs.
It wou
, 2007 5:53 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research]
Ed Porter wrote:
Richard,
To the uninformed like me, can you explain why it would be so easy for an
intelligent person to cause great harm on the net. What are the major
weaknesses of
Message-
From: Richard Loosemore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 5:53 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research]
Ed Porter wrote:
> Richard,
>
> To the uninformed like me, can you explain why it wo
Thanks, Richard. That was interesting.
-Original Message-
From: Richard Loosemore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 8:22 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research]
Ed Porter wrote:
> Rich
hat was interesting.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Loosemore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 8:22 PM
> To: agi@v2.listbox.com
> Subject: Re: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research]
>
>
> Ed Porter wrote
On Nov 29, 2007 8:33 AM, Bob Mottram wrote:
> My own opinion of all this, for what it's worth, is that the smart
> hackers don't waste their time writing viruses/botnets. There are
> many harder problems to which an intelligent mind can be applied.
>
>
This discussion is a bit out of date. Nowad
ge-
From: Richard Loosemore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 8:22 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research]
Ed Porter wrote:
> Richard,
>
> What ever happen to the Java concept of the sandbox, t
has an urgent need for trapdoor mechanisms that let
> them build various interesting pieces of software (e.g. key loggers) so
> they can monitor people who are not fascists.
>
>
>
> Richard Loosemore
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-
> > From: Richard Loosemore
BillK wrote:
On Nov 29, 2007 8:33 AM, Bob Mottram wrote:
My own opinion of all this, for what it's worth, is that the smart
hackers don't waste their time writing viruses/botnets. There are
many harder problems to which an intelligent mind can be applied.
This discussion is a bit out of da
> From: BillK [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> This discussion is a bit out of date. Nowadays no hackers (except for
> script kiddies) are interested in wiping hard disks or damaging your
> pc. Hackers want to *use* your pc and the data on it. Mostly the
> general public don't even notice their pc i
Bringing a little levity to the hacker/virus debate...
http://www.xkcd.com/350/
On Nov 29, 2007 4:40 PM, John G. Rose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > From: BillK [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > This discussion is a bit out of date. Nowadays no hackers (except for
> > script kiddies) are interes
There have been a few attempts to use the internet for data collection
which might be used to build AIs, or for teaching chatbots such as
jabberwacky, but you're right that as yet nobody has really made use
of the internet as a basis for distributed intelligence. I think this
is primarily because
> From: Bob Mottram [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> There have been a few attempts to use the internet for data collection
> which might be used to build AIs, or for teaching chatbots such as
> jabberwacky, but you're right that as yet nobody has really made use
> of the internet as a basis for dist
such as with something like
OpenCog.
Ed Porter
-Original Message-
From: Bob Mottram [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 5:26 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research]
There have been a few attempts t
Ed Porter wrote:
Richard,
Since hacking is a fairly big, organized crime supported, business in
eastern Europe and Russia, since the potential rewards for it relative to
most jobs in those countries can be huge, and since Russia has a tradition
of excellence in math and science, I would be very
36 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research]
Ed Porter wrote:
> Richard,
>
> Since hacking is a fairly big, organized crime supported, business in
> eastern Europe and Russia, since the potential rewards for it relative to
>
> From: Ed Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> As I have said many before, to have brain-level AGI I believe you need
> within several orders of magnitude the representational, computational,
> and
> interconnect capability of the human mind.
>
> If you had 1 million PC bots on the web, the represe
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 6:13 PM
> To: agi@v2.listbox.com
> Subject: RE: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI
> research]
>
> John,
>
> Thank you for the info.
>
> I just did a rough count of all the "IMG SRC="htt
mber 29, 2007 7:27 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: RE: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research]
> From: Ed Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> As I have said many before, to have brain-level AGI I believe you need
> within several orders of magnitude the represe
D]
> Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 6:50 PM
> To: agi@v2.listbox.com
> Subject: RE: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI
> research]
>
> John,
>
> Somebody (I think it was David Hart) told me there is a shareware
> distributed web crawler already available,
ohn
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 6:13 PM
> To: agi@v2.listbox.com
> Subject: RE: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI
> research]
>
> John,
>
> Thank you for the info.
>
peers increases.
John
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 10:10 AM
> To: agi@v2.listbox.com
> Subject: RE: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI
> research]
>
> John,
>
> Thanks.
>
age-
> From: Ed Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 12:06 PM
> To: agi@v2.listbox.com
> Subject: RE: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI
> research]
>
> John,
>
> Thanks. I guess that means and AGI-at-home system cou
RL:However, I have previously written a good deal about the design of
different types of motivation system, and my understanding of the likely
situation is that by the time we had gotten the AGI working, its
motivations would have been arranged in such a way that it would *want*
to be extremely co
essage-
> From: Ed Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 6:50 PM
> To: agi@v2.listbox.com
> Subject: RE: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI
> research]
>
> John,
>
> Somebody (I think it was David Hart) told me there is a sh
t
of cable-box connected PC's and a distributed web crawler.
Ed Porter
-Original Message-
From: John G. Rose [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 12:33 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: RE: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research]
Hi Ed,
If
Charles D Hixson wrote:
Ed Porter wrote:
Richard,
Since hacking is a fairly big, organized crime supported, business in
eastern Europe and Russia, since the potential rewards for it relative to
most jobs in those countries can be huge, and since Russia has a
tradition
of excellence in math an
2:55 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: RE: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research]
Ed,
That is probably a good rough estimate. There are more headers for the more
frequently transmitted smaller messages but a 16 byte header may be a bit
large.
Here is a speedtest link -
AIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2007 6:41 PM
> To: agi@v2.listbox.com
> Subject: RE: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI
> research]
>
> John,
>
> I tested Exeter, NH to LA at 5371kbs download, and 362Kbs upload.
> Strangelly
> my scores
On Sunday 02 December 2007, John G. Rose wrote:
> Building up parse trees and word sense models, let's say that would
> be a first step. And then say after a while this was accomplished and
> running on some peers. What would the next theoretical step be?
I am not sure what the next step would be.
Ed Porter wrote:
Once you build up good models for parsing and word sense, then you read
large amounts of text and start building up model of the realities described
and generalizations from them.
Assuming this is a continuation of the discussion of an AGI-at-home P2P
system, you are going to be
could be a valuable
initial source of one component of world knowledge for use by AGI.
Ed Porter
-Original Message-
From: Bryan Bishop [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 7:33 AM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI
> From: Richard Loosemore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> The reason it reminds me of this episode is that you are calmly talking
> here about "the high dimensional problem of seeking to understand the
> meaning of text, which often involve multiple levels of implication,
> which would normally be a
--- Richard Loosemore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Menawhile, unfortunately, solving all those other issues like making
> parsers and trying to do word-sense disambiguation would not help one
> whit to get the real theoretical task done.
I agree. AI has a long history of doing the easy part of
Matt:: The whole point of using massive parallel computation is to do the
hard part of the problem.
I get it : you and most other AI-ers are equating "hard" with "very, very
complex," right? But you don't seriously think that the human mind
successfully deals with language by "massive paralle
> From: Bryan Bishop [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> I am not sure what the next step would be. The first step might be
> enough for the moment. When you have the network functioning at all,
> expose an API so that other programmers can come in and try to utilize
> sentence analysis (and other function
> From: Ed Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Once you build up good models for parsing and word sense, then you read
> large amounts of text and start building up model of the realities
> described
> and generalizations from them.
>
> Assuming this is a continuation of the discussion of an AGI-at
John G. Rose wrote:
From: Richard Loosemore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[snip]
I am not being negative, I am just relaying the standard understanding
of priorities in the AGI field as a whole. Send complaints addressed to
"AGI Community", not to me, please.
You are being negative! And since wh
Mike Tintner wrote:
Matt:: The whole point of using massive parallel computation is to do the
hard part of the problem.
I get it : you and most other AI-ers are equating "hard" with "very,
very complex," right? But you don't seriously think that the human mind
successfully deals with languag
believe there are positive reasons to believe that the current
strategies *will* not scale up.
Richard Loosemore
-Original Message-
From: Richard Loosemore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 10:07 AM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Hacker intelligence leve
> From: Richard Loosemore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> It is easy for a research field to agree that certain problems are
> really serious and unsolved.
>
> A hundred years ago, the results of the Michelson-Morley experiments
> were a big unsolved problem, and pretty serious for the foundations of
ely few computations"
and/or models that are appropriate in a complex context without massive
computation?
-Original Message-
From: Mike Tintner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 12:12 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi]
On Dec 3, 2007 12:12 PM, Mike Tintner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I get it : you and most other AI-ers are equating "hard" with "very, very
> complex," right? But you don't seriously think that the human mind
> successfully deals with language by "massive parallel computation", do you?
Very very
RL: One thing that can be easily measured is the "activation" of lexical
items related in various ways to a presented word (i.e. show the subject
the word "Doctor" and test to see if the word "Nurse" gets activated).
It turns out that within an extremely short time of the forst word being
seen, a
--- Mike Tintner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On the one hand, we can perhaps agree that one of the brain's glories is
> that it can very rapidly draw analogies - that I can quickly produce a
> string of associations like, say, "snake", "rope," "chain", "spaghetti
> strand," - and you may quick
ll computers.
So lift thine eyes up unto Hecht-Nielsen -- (and his cat with whom he
generously shares credit for Confabulation) -- and believe!
Ed Porter
-Original Message-
From: Richard Loosemore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 12:49 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.
MIKE TINTNER "Isn't it obvious that the brain is able to understand the
wealth of language by relatively few computations - quite intricate,
hierarchical, multi-levelled processing,"
ED PORTER How do you find the right set of "relatively few computations"
and/or models that are appropriat
Ed Porter wrote:
RICHARD LOOSEMORE I cannot even begin to do justice, here, to the issues
involved in solving "the high dimensional problem of seeking to understand
the meaning of text, which often involve multiple levels of implication,
which would normally be accomplished by some sort of se
Ed Porter wrote:
RICHARD LOOSEMORE I cannot even begin to do justice, here, to the issues
involved in solving "the high dimensional problem of seeking to understand
the meaning of text, which often involve multiple levels of implication,
which would normally be accomplished by some sort of se
Matt: Semantic models learn associations by proximity in the training text.
The
degree to which you associate "snake" and "rope" depends on how often these
words appear near each other
Correct me - but it's the old, old problem here, isn't it? Those semantic
models/programs won't be able to fo
--- Ed Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We do not know the number and width of the spreading activation that is
> necessary for human level reasoning over world knowledge. Thus, we really
> don't know how much interconnect is needed and thus how large of a P2P net
> would be needed for impressi
--- Mike Tintner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matt: Semantic models learn associations by proximity in the training text.
> The
> degree to which you associate "snake" and "rope" depends on how often these
> words appear near each other
>
> Correct me - but it's the old, old problem here, isn't
Mike
-Original Message-
From: Mike Tintner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 8:25 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research]
>>>MIKE TINTNER>>>> "Isn't it obvious that the
>RICHARD LOOSEMORE=> I'm sorry, but this is not addressing the actual
issues involved.
You are implicitly assuming a certain framework for solving the problem
of representing knowledge ... and then all your discussion is about
whether or not it is feasible to implement that framework (to
>Richard Loosemore=> None of the above is relevant. The issue is not
whether toy problems
set within the current paradigm can be done with this or that search
algorithm, it is whether the current paradigm can be made to converge at
all for non-toy problems.
Ed Porter=> Richard, I woul
that.
Ed Porter
-Original Message-
From: Matt Mahoney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 8:51 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: RE: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research]
--- Ed Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We do not know
ember 03, 2007 8:51 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: RE: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research]
--- Ed Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We do not know the number and width of the spreading activation that is
> necessary for human level reasoning over world
On Thursday 29 November 2007, Ed Porter wrote:
> Somebody (I think it was David Hart) told me there is a shareware
> distributed web crawler already available, but I don't know the
> details, such as how good or fast it is.
http://grub.org/
Previous owner went by the name of 'kordless'. I found hi
Ed Porter wrote:
Richard Loosemore=> None of the above is relevant. The issue is not
whether toy problems
set within the current paradigm can be done with this or that search
algorithm, it is whether the current paradigm can be made to converge at
all for non-toy problems.
Ed Porter
Ed Porter wrote:
RICHARD LOOSEMORE=> I'm sorry, but this is not addressing the actual
issues involved.
You are implicitly assuming a certain framework for solving the problem
of representing knowledge ... and then all your discussion is about
whether or not it is feasible to implement
RE: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research]ED>>>> Yes,
but there are a lot of types of thinking that cannot be done by shape alone,
and shape is actually much more complicated than shape. There is shape, and
shape distorted by perspective, and shape change
the number of choices is few.
John
_
From: Ed Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 6:17 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: RE: Hacker intelligence level
Bryan, The name grub sounds familiar. That is probably it. Ed
-Original Message-
From: Bryan Bishop [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 10:47 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research]
On Thursday 29
s question is raised as to
whether you are worth listening to or conversing with.
ED PORTER
-Original Message-
From: Richard Loosemore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 10:47 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 1:42 AM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: RE: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research]
Ed,
Well it'd be nice having a supercomputer but P2P is a poor man's
supercomputer and beggars can't be choosy.
Hones
Ed Porter wrote:
RICHARD LOOSEMORE=> You have no idea of the context in which I made
that sweeping dismissal.
If you have enough experience of research in this area you will know
that it is filled with bandwagons, hype and publicity-seeking. Trivial
models are presented as if they are
se in this thread. You can have the last say if
you so wish.
-Original Message-
From: Richard Loosemore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 9:58 AM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research]
Ed Porter wrote
> From: Ed Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> John,
>
> I am sure there is interesting stuff that can be done. It would be
> interesting just to see what sort of an agi could be made on a PC.
Yes it would be interesting to see what could be done on a small cluster of
modern server grade computer
weights on its index links to more efficiency allocate index activations.
How does your intelligent indexing work?
Ed Porter
-Original Message-
From: John G. Rose [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 2:17 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: RE: Hacker intelligenc
ng too into details. Very primitive still ...
John
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: John G. Rose [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 2:17 PM
> To: agi@v2.listbox.com
> Subject: RE: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI
> research]
>
--- Ed Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matt,
>
> IN my Mon 12/3/2007 8:17 PM post to John Rose from which your are probably
> quoting below I discussed the bandwidth issues. I am assuming nodes
> directly talk to each other, which is probably overly optimistic, but still
> are limited by the
N -- MIGHT HAVE.
Matt, it sounds as if OpenCog ever tries to build a large P2P network "you
the man".
Ed Porter
-Original Message-
From: Matt Mahoney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 7:42 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: RE: Hacker intelligenc
Ed Porter wrote:
Richard,
It is not clear how valuable your 25 years of hard won learning is if
it causes you to dismiss valuable scientific work that seems to have
eclipsed the importance of anything I or you have published as
"trivial exercises in public relations" without giving any reaso
> Thus: building a NL parser, no matter how good it is, is of no use
> whatsoever unless it can be shown to emerge from (or at least fit with)
> a learning mechanism that allows the system itself to generate its own
> understanding (or, at least, acquisition) of grammar IN THE CONTEXT OF A
> MECHAN
--- Ed Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >MATT MAHONEY=> My design would use most of the Internet (10^9 P2P
> nodes).
> ED PORTER=> That's ambitious. Easier said than done unless you have a
> Google, Microsoft, or mass popular movement backing you.
It would take some free software tha
Benjamin Goertzel wrote:
Thus: building a NL parser, no matter how good it is, is of no use
whatsoever unless it can be shown to emerge from (or at least fit with)
a learning mechanism that allows the system itself to generate its own
understanding (or, at least, acquisition) of grammar IN THE CO
d matching can scale
relatively well in a sparsely connected world.
That is important, for those with the vision to understand.
Ed Porter
-Original Message-
From: Benjamin Goertzel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 8:59 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Hacker intell
massive interconnected needed for powerful
AGI much more efficiently.
Ed Porter
-Original Message-
From: Matt Mahoney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 9:18 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: RE: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research
OK, understood...
On Dec 4, 2007 9:32 PM, Richard Loosemore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Benjamin Goertzel wrote:
> >> Thus: building a NL parser, no matter how good it is, is of no use
> >> whatsoever unless it can be shown to emerge from (or at least fit with)
> >> a learning mechanism that al
entence -- or, more critically, *any* of the math).
Are all your claims on this list this far from reality if one pursues them?
- Original Message -
From: "Ed Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:52 PM
Subject: RE: Hacker intelligence level
TED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 3:16 AM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research]
On 12/5/07, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip] Centralized search is limited to a few big players that
can keep a copy of the I
e you trash me so harshly, please take a little
more care to be sure your criticisms are actually justified.
Ed Porter
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Waser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 10:27 AM
To: agi@v2.listbox
ED PORTER=> The 500K dimensions were mentioned several times in a
lecture Collins gave at MIT about his parse. This was probably 5 years ago
so I am not 100% sure the number was 500K, but I am about 90% sure that was
the number used, and 100% sure the number was well over 100K.
OK. I'll bit
: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research]
Ed Porter wrote:
> Mark,
>
>> MARK WASER===> You claim that "It is actually showing that you can do
> something roughly equivalent to growing neural gas (GNG) in a space with
> something approaching 500,000
e to match it is potentially capability of
matching it against any of its dimensions.
Ed Porter
-Original Message-
From: Mark Waser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 3:07 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AG
Dimensions is an awfully odd word for that since dimensions are normally
assumed to be orthogonal.
- Original Message -
From: "Ed Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 5:08 PM
Subject: RE: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Fund
Wow. Is that what dot products are?
You're confusing all sorts of related concepts with a really garbled
vocabulary.
Let's do this with some concrete 10-D geometry . . . . Vector A runs from
(0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0) to (1, 1, 0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0). Vector B runs from
(0,0,0) to (1, 0, 1,0,
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 3:40 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research]
Wow. Is that what dot products are?
You're confusing all sorts of related concepts with a really garbled
vocabulary.
Let
They need not be.
-Original Message-
From: Mark Waser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 6:04 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research]
Dimensions is an awfully odd word for that since dimensions are
On 12/5/07, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> [snip] Centralized search is limited to a few big players that
> can keep a copy of the Internet on their servers. Google is certainly
> useful,
> but imagine if it searched a space 1000 times larger and if posts were
> instantly added to
> From: Matt Mahoney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> My design would use most of the Internet (10^9 P2P nodes). Messages
> would be
> natural language text strings, making no distinction between documents,
> queries, and responses. Each message would have a header indicating the
> ID
> and time stamp
THE KEY POINT I WAS TRYING TO GET ACROSS WAS ABOUT NOT HAVING TO
EXPLICITLY DEAL WITH 500K TUPLES
And I asked -- Do you believe that this is some sort of huge conceptual
breakthrough?
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, pl
ppropriate than that Collin's paper discloses.
Ed Porter
-Original Message-
From: Mark Waser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 9:09 AM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research]
>> THE KEY POINT
Ed,
Get a grip. Try to write with complete words in complete sentences
(unless discreted means a combination of excreted and discredited -- which
works for me :-).
I'm not coming back for a second swing. I'm still pursuing the first
one. You just aren't oriented well enough to reali
: Mark Waser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 1:24 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Hacker intelligence level [WAS Re: [agi] Funding AGI research]
Ed,
Get a grip. Try to write with complete words in complete sentences
(unless discreted means a combination
1 - 100 of 133 matches
Mail list logo
