Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 11:21 PM, David Barbour wrote: > I think you're being optimistic about human rationality there. (I > disagree. QED.) > > > Hmm, well, I'm afraid that indeed I would have only been right if we were all consistently rational. And definitely we are not. I find interesting how

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins (Lt and other DSLs)

It would seem like NLP should be based on phonemes, not written language. One cannot say what the name of God is, because written Hebrew lacks vowels. We should go with phonemes, I believe. On Apr 7, 2013 9:36 PM, "John Carlson" wrote: > I looked at Lt. Reminds me of John Orwant's Extensible Gra

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins (Lt and other DSLs)

I looked at Lt. Reminds me of John Orwant's Extensible Graphical Game Generator. If you like s-expressions, there are other DSLs for games from stanford and australia. Are you envisioning a DSL for NLP? On Apr 7, 2013 9:27 PM, "John Carlson" wrote: > What is the Peano of NLP? Humanity? I'll c

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

What is the Peano of NLP? Humanity? I'll check previous messages. On Apr 7, 2013 8:25 PM, "John Carlson" wrote: > Why math/logic loses, munchhausen trilemma: > http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%BCnchhausen_trilemma > On Apr 7, 2013 8:20 PM, "John Carlson" wrote: > >> On further review the pe

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

Why math/logic loses, munchhausen trilemma: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%BCnchhausen_trilemma On Apr 7, 2013 8:20 PM, "John Carlson" wrote: > On further review the person in question admitted being human...one of > God's bots he says. I'm trying to convince him that God wants more than >

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

On further review the person in question admitted being human...one of God's bots he says. I'm trying to convince him that God wants more than bots. I just realized the religious discussion was likely created by a bot. Sorry. John ___ fonc mailing list

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

I just realized the religious discussion was likely created by a bot. Sorry. John ___ fonc mailing list fonc@vpri.org http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

I think you're being optimistic about human rationality there. (I disagree. QED.) On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 6:37 PM, Fernando Cacciola < fernando.cacci...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 2:58 PM, BGB wrote: > >> >> >> expecting everyone to agree on much of anything is probably unrealist

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 2:58 PM, BGB wrote: > > > expecting everyone to agree on much of anything is probably unrealistic... > > Yet there is one thing we can all agree on... that we cannot all agree on one thing. -- Fernando Cacciola SciSoft Consulting, Founder http://www.scisoft-consulting.co

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

Excuse me, but when did this list turn into a forum for religious /bible discussion? Can we get back to issues in computing, please? Thank you, Kim Rose Viewpoints Research Viewpoints Research is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization dedicated to improving "powerful ideas education" for the world

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

"Fundamentals of New Computing" does sound like another religious fork or a new cult when you say it in this thread. On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Reuben Thomas wrote: > On 6 April 2013 18:09, Eugen Leitl wrote: > >> On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 12:08:35PM -0500, John Carlson wrote: >> > The Lor

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

On 4/6/2013 12:13 PM, Reuben Thomas wrote: On 6 April 2013 18:09, Eugen Leitl > wrote: On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 12:08:35PM -0500, John Carlson wrote: > The Lord will return like a thief in the night: > http://bible.cc/1_thessalonians/5-2.htm > Is this predi

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

On 6 April 2013 18:09, Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 12:08:35PM -0500, John Carlson wrote: > > The Lord will return like a thief in the night: > > http://bible.cc/1_thessalonians/5-2.htm > > Is this predictable? Is there more than one return? Jews believe in one > > Messiah. Chr

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

And by 2028, we will be living 120 years or more, which will extend the end-event even more. On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 11:12 AM, BGB wrote: > On 4/6/2013 10:59 AM, John Carlson wrote: > > When I was studying Revelation in the 1980s. We thought this same > scripture referred to the European Union

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 12:08:35PM -0500, John Carlson wrote: > The Lord will return like a thief in the night: > http://bible.cc/1_thessalonians/5-2.htm > Is this predictable? Is there more than one return? Jews believe in one > Messiah. Christians believe in 2 Messiahs (Jesus and his return).

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

The Lord will return like a thief in the night: http://bible.cc/1_thessalonians/5-2.htm Is this predictable? Is there more than one return? Jews believe in one Messiah. Christians believe in 2 Messiahs (Jesus and his return). Anyone for 3 or 4 or more? On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 11:12 AM, BGB wr

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

On 4/6/2013 10:59 AM, John Carlson wrote: When I was studying Revelation in the 1980s. We thought this same scripture referred to the European Union. We also thought that Jesus had to return by 1988, because that was one generation past when the Jews returned to Israel in 1948. It seems tha

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

When I was studying Revelation in the 1980s. We thought this same scripture referred to the European Union. We also thought that Jesus had to return by 1988, because that was one generation past when the Jews returned to Israel in 1948. It seems that god has a way of overturning predictions. So

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

My favorite Umberto Eco quote from Foucault's Pendulum is "vous etes fou" (sorry english keyboard).▲ On Apr 6, 2013 9:53 AM, "John Carlson" wrote: > Sorry. I meant heard. Obviously I am imperfect. I have read Foucault's > Pendulum, however. Maybe we should start quoting it instead of the Bibl

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

Sorry. I meant heard. Obviously I am imperfect. I have read Foucault's Pendulum, however. Maybe we should start quoting it instead of the Bible. On Apr 6, 2013 9:36 AM, "John Carlson" wrote: > I once hear it said that Jesus didn't tell us to be perfect, instead he > told us to mature and bear

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

I once hear it said that Jesus didn't tell us to be perfect, instead he told us to mature and bear good fruit. Have you? On Apr 6, 2013 5:32 AM, "Kirk Fraser" wrote: > Most likely your personal skills at natural language are insufficient to > understand Revelation in the Bible, like mine were un

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

! Karl On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Kirk Fraser wrote: > Most likely your personal skills at natural language are insufficient to > understand Revelation in the Bible, like mine were until I spent lots of > time learning. Now I can predict the current Pope Francis will eventually > help cre

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

Most likely your personal skills at natural language are insufficient to understand Revelation in the Bible, like mine were until I spent lots of time learning. Now I can predict the current Pope Francis will eventually help create the 7 nation Islamic Caliphate with 3 extra-national military powe

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

Charlie Derr wrote: Nevertheless I'm finding some of this conversation truly fascinating (though I'm having a little trouble figuring out what is "truth" and what isn't). I'm just waiting for Kirk to mention Atlantis or the Rosicrucians. It feels like it could be any moment...

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

Ya think!? Did I really just waste five minutes...? Let us all go home and try to regain some clarity. Interesting points all but are we done? Alan M. On Apr 5, 2013, at 1:35 PM, shaun gilchrist wrote: I am now convinced we are on some sort of mailing list version of candid camera. Or maybe t

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

I am now convinced we are on some sort of mailing list version of candid camera. Or maybe these messages are the product of some strange markovian email generator programmed to create dissonance by combining fringe comp sci theories with offensive social commentary normally reserved for talk radio.

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 04/05/2013 04:19 PM, Kirk Fraser wrote: > Tune in to Rush via iheart radio and listen for about 6 weeks and you'll have > more clarity on what liberal actually > means in America. Heh. This statement far more offensive than all of the overt rel

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

Gath, So what language do you normally think in? You have stated you don't live in America. Obviously you haven't listened to Rush Limbaugh long enough to know what liberal is. Why comment on things you know so little about? Tune in to Rush via iheart radio and listen for about 6 weeks and you

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 7:59 PM, Kirk Fraser wrote: > I was pointing out that innovation for its own sake is worthless then was > agreeing with the view that not all the world's inventions come from people > who think in English yet pointing out communicating in English is best for > world wide di

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

I was pointing out that innovation for its own sake is worthless then was agreeing with the view that not all the world's inventions come from people who think in English yet pointing out communicating in English is best for world wide distribution. I don't really know how many Jews who won Nobel

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 06:42:53AM -0700, Kirk Fraser wrote: > […] Truly worthwhile inventions judging by percent of Nobel Prize > awards are by Jews, hence in Hebrew. […] Are your saying that most Nobel prize winning Jews were using Hebrew to think the thoughts that lead them to the Nobel prize?

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

Apology accepted. ;-) Julian On 06/04/2013, at 12:42 AM, Kirk Fraser wrote: > Actually that's your reasoning. Years ago when I was in college, educators > wrote that innovation for innovation's sake is worth nothing. Truly > worthwhile inventions judging by percent of Nobel Prize awards are

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

The fact that we're not communicating very effectively disproves your point. ;-) Julian On 06/04/2013, at 12:42 AM, Kirk Fraser wrote: > Actually that's your reasoning. Years ago when I was in college, educators > wrote that innovation for innovation's sake is worth nothing. Truly > worthwh

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

Actually that's your reasoning. Years ago when I was in college, educators wrote that innovation for innovation's sake is worth nothing. Truly worthwhile inventions judging by percent of Nobel Prize awards are by Jews, hence in Hebrew. But until the world converts to their superior culture, inve

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

Hi, I don't think this acronym is in wide use, but probably Introduction To Algorithms by Cormen was meant. Cheers, Jarosław Rzeszótko 2013/4/5 Piers Cawley > Okay, SICP, EOPL and TAPL I've worked out (own/am working through > slowly). But ItoA? Google wasn't exactly helpful here. > > On 4 Ap

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

On 2013-04-05 11:40AM, Piers Cawley wrote: >Okay, SICP, EOPL and TAPL I've worked out (own/am working through >slowly). But ItoA? Google wasn't exactly helpful here. Probably _Introduction to Algorithms_ by Cormen, Leiserson, Rivest, and Stein. --Josh _

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

Okay, SICP, EOPL and TAPL I've worked out (own/am working through slowly). But ItoA? Google wasn't exactly helpful here. On 4 April 2013 22:22, Gath-Gealaich wrote: > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:01 PM, Kirk Fraser > wrote: >> >> >>> Fortran was displaced in business because early Fortran had no st

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

On 05/04/2013, at 7:19 AM, Kirk Fraser wrote: > The main source of invention is not "math wins" as described on > http://www.vpri.org/html/work/ifnct.htm since the world would be speaking > math if it were really the source of inspiring more inventions that improve > the world's standard of l

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

Am 04.04.13 22:53, schrieb John Carlson: > > Natural languages include tenses. What computer systems have a wide > variety of tenses? > John McCarthy analyzed this in his description of Elephant 2000 [1] sentence "Algolic programs refer to the past via variables, arrays and other data structures."

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:13 PM, Kirk Fraser wrote: > Liberal dictionaries have definitions that are by default wrong. There's no such thing as "liberal dictionaries". > For evidence of language decay, read definitions from the 1988 > Webster's Collegiate vs. the current Webster's. Pure word

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:01 PM, Kirk Fraser wrote: > > Fortran was displaced in business because early Fortran had no structures >> and random record-oriented file access, and because of some silly >> government requirements for computer system procurement. >> > > Not according to management at C

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

Liberal dictionaries have definitions that are by default wrong. For evidence of language decay, read definitions from the 1988 Webster's Collegiate vs. the current Webster's. Pure word and definition is needed to understand truth. People who love to lie get along without words meaning things. F

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 1:38 PM, Gath-Gealaich wrote: > "The first math language Fortran was soon displaced in business by more > readable code afforded by Cobol's longer variable names." > > Fortran was displaced in business because early Fortran had no structures > and random record-oriented file

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

Natural languages include tenses. What computer systems have a wide variety of tenses? ___ fonc mailing list fonc@vpri.org http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

"Not to say English best but it is what most people know and using it in programs would make them readable by more people until people adopt a purer language like Hebrew." I'm not sure if you're joking or trolling, but Hebrew is hardly a "purer language" by any definition, as there is no such thin

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

It appears you are successfully working with English as do most people [**citation needed**] who communicate internationally. Not to say English best but it is what most people know [**citation needed**] and using it in programs would make them readable by more people [**no evidence for this hypot

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

Actually zero difference in readability by me or anyone else who understands English but not Lojban or any trivial language. On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 1:47 PM, John Carlson wrote: > Esperanto was intended to be a human understandable language. Lojban is > intended to be a computer and human unders

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

Esperanto was intended to be a human understandable language. Lojban is intended to be a computer and human understandable language...huge difference. On Apr 4, 2013 3:39 PM, "Kirk Fraser" wrote: > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 1:26 PM, John Carlson wrote: > >> I didn't see lojban mentioned. http://e

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 1:40 PM, Tristan Slominski < tristan.slomin...@gmail.com> wrote: > "Thus a major improvement for world computing would be careful adherence > to a world wide natural language" > > That seems to be contrary to how the world works. We can't even agree > whether to read bytes f

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

"Thus a major improvement for world computing would be careful adherence to a world wide natural language" That seems to be contrary to how the world works. We can't even agree whether to read bytes from right to left or left to right ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endianness). http://xkcd.com/92

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 1:26 PM, John Carlson wrote: > I didn't see lojban mentioned. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lojban > Consider it equal to Esperanto in context of my argument. ___ fonc mailing list fonc@vpri.org http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

"The first math language Fortran was soon displaced in business by more readable code afforded by Cobol's longer variable names." Fortran was displaced in business because early Fortran had no structures and random record-oriented file access, and because of some silly government requirements for

Re: [fonc] Natural Language Wins

I didn't see lojban mentioned. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lojban On Apr 4, 2013 3:19 PM, "Kirk Fraser" wrote: > The main source of invention is not "math wins" as described on > http://www.vpri.org/html/work/ifnct.htm since the world would be speaking > math if it were really the source of i

[fonc] Natural Language Wins

The main source of invention is not "math wins" as described on http://www.vpri.org/html/work/ifnct.htm since the world would be speaking math if it were really the source of inspiring more inventions that improve the world's standard of living. Math helps add precision to tasks that involve count