Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
General Discussion / Re: Too Cool not to post
« Last post by Halleyscomet on Today at 02:51:38 PM »
No one's spotted the beagle yet...?

I found the bagel.
2
Tech Talk / Re: The Omnibus Sex Robots thread
« Last post by Billzbub on Today at 02:45:19 PM »
You know, it is probably not too hard to come up with a 3D scan of many people just from their social media, which is publically available.  By the time we have a to-order sex bot industry, we will also have software that you can feed pictures or videos into that can generate the necessary 3D data for the bot.  As the images were obtained from a public source, it defeats the copywrite issue.  Every celebrity and every person with a prominent online presence would be fair game.

On another note, do celebrities have to give their consent when a wax museum makes a sculpture of them and then charges admission to see it?  I briefly search on line and found that Madame Tussaud's gets permission, but do they really have to?
3
Uhhhh yeah. The overly verbose and near complete agreement immediately after a banning is beyond unsubtle.

It looks like Jeebus was banned on 2 days ago based on first page.
I wouldn't bother to ask a question if I had known Jeebus was banned.
I'm sorry if my earlier answer wasn't similar enough to the other posters here.

(But I don't like denying evidence, and the OP is applying basic thermodynamics, everybody knows entropy is increasing, and never decrease globally, so the OP is not absurd!)
4
General Discussion / Re: Too Cool not to post
« Last post by Fast Eddie B on Today at 02:43:54 PM »
No one's spotted the beagle yet...?

Or Waldo!
5
I don't usually engage in this sort of name calling but, my dime is on another sock puppet.

It looks like somewhat agreeing with strange OP's is uncommon on the internet?
Somewhat agreeing with  a strangers up who was recently banned due to sock puppetry as your second post on  a forum is suspicious.
Uhhhh yeah. The overly verbose and near complete agreement immediately after a banning is beyond unsubtle.
6
General Discussion / Re: Too Cool not to post
« Last post by Paul Blevins Jr. on Today at 02:29:58 PM »
No one's spotted the beagle yet...?
7
I don't usually engage in this sort of name calling but, my dime is on another sock puppet.

It looks like somewhat agreeing with strange OP's is uncommon on the internet?
Somewhat agreeing with  a strangers up who was recently banned due to sock puppetry as your second post on  a forum is suspicious.
8
I don't usually engage in this sort of name calling but, my dime is on another sock puppet.

It looks like somewhat agreeing with strange OP's is uncommon on the internet?
9
I don't usually engage in this sort of name calling but, my dime is on another sock puppet.
10
I became an atheist several years ago, and for a long while I thought life was purposeless. I am still an atheist today, but two years ago, I discovered that science had something to say about the purpose of human life in particular.
•   Science reasonably indicates that the purpose of human life is likely to engineer the creation of Artificial General Intelligence!
•   But why is the purpose of human life reasonably to create Artificial General Intelligence?

https://www.quora.com/Why-is-the-purpose-of-human-life-to-create-artificial-general-intelligence/answer/Jordan-Bennett-9

What a freaky post, but interesting and maybe actually thought provoking topic. I will give a long analysis below.

I checked out some of your other stuff on quora, to see if you were a crackpot, and you seem legit based on your "Artificial Neural Network for kids" (is that actually for kids, it's very detailed, with a tonne of maths, but at least the code at the start seems to run) but when I got to the "Supersymmetric Artificial Neural Network" (That one makes me think you are cuckoo, and there's only psuedo-code for that one, and you say it's String theory powered neural network?, I can't make any sense of that one!).

Anyway, I don't like the use of the word "purpose" because it reminds me of theism, i.e. that there is some intention behind.





I used to do some assembly coding, but I never did develop the stomach for AI stuff, although I follow the latest things.

The Sophia bot lead me to find out about prof Ben Gortzel, who says AGI can be the last invention mankind need ever make (In the video above).

I did some more research, and found out that AGI may actually be very important, because it can help us solve most if not all human problems, like cancer, etc, because AGI are supposed to not be limited by human conditions or brain capacity!



But as I said, I don't like the use of the word purpose.

But then again, purpose doesn't have to be about intention or deities, and it may concern reason, based on google definition.

So I guess it's not strange to really say humans' reason is to make AGI, if AGI will do better entropy maximization as you say in OP. (If you're talking about thermodynamics and entropy maximization)

You must be aware that thermodynamics is not really set in stone, although it is our best bet for observing things dealing with entropy so far (if I am not mistaken).



My final scientific criticism sort of:

Actually, the equations in Alex Wisnner's paper (which you used to help make your hypothesis) do not have a high enough resolution to cover human cognition biased towards entropy maximization, although Alex does talk about chimps on page 4 (he mostly said that simple systems *behave* like human society).

So your hypothesis is mostly not empirically founded, although future work, there may be a set of modified equations that may be high enough in resolution, or complicated enough to capture human cognitive behavior as it relates to entropy maximization!




*Edit*:

Okay I see that you didn't actually say the equations covered human behavior, but Alex's paper talked about chimps, and systems that exhibited human like behavior, so I see why you called it an hypothesis. Do you plan to extend this work, because much more could be done?

Also, if you could ditch the word "purpose" that would be cool, because although it is technically not wrong, purpose can also mean intention, and then people are going to want to criticize that although the word doesn't have to mean intention, and this will waste debate time. (Advice from atheist to atheist)
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
personate-rain
personate-rain