289500+ entries in 0.185s
Framedragger: mircea_popescu: hmm; but you did supply her with some "aesthetics" feedback, maybe even a floating point value, as in, "better/worse
than before", perhaps
diana_coman: uhm,
they got beaten (once), corrected punctually etc so
they are just learning
mircea_popescu: but while i don't for a second suspect you of gender politics, nevertheless,
there you go, you did it
to
them. what now.
diana_coman: that
thing when it *works* as in...now,
this particular
thing, don't change anything or it might all fall down
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform
that's fine, computer will outlast
the millenium.
diana_coman: thing is:
the results were atrocious really
mircea_popescu: once
they mixed
the genders
they fucked it all up.
THAT is why "stundent quality is on downspiral"
mircea_popescu: diana_coman likely, which is
the irony here. you can either have schooling for boys, or for girls.
Framedragger: girl internalizes environment which may include
the beater who is giving her feedback, no?
mircea_popescu: and
THEN you will be able
to bake, correctly, pastry you never even learned HOW
to bake
diana_coman: by
this model, I'd say
that
those poor students I failed were actually
trying
to apply exactly mircea_popescu 's approach!
mircea_popescu: in
this sense no item is ever contained, including anything made by
texas instruments.
Framedragger: surely said girl engaged in some kind of feedback process with
the environment, internalizing some model which fits reality; so not wholly contained?
mircea_popescu: computers, unlike people, have
the advantage
that no subjective "reasons"
to blind self
to it (~= menstruation)
mircea_popescu: she fucking had it from
the get-go.
this is inescapable.
mircea_popescu: here's
the problemn with
this : at first, girl "just doesn'tr have" information on how
to bake pastries.
then she gets beaten (rarely), corrected (often, but in specific punctual detail) and made
to work.
then, magically, and i can't underscore
this enough, MAGICALLY, she now HAS!!!
the information.
a111: Logged on 2016-06-23 14:26 mircea_popescu: now, it is real easy
to grant
that "machine can't resolve because irl it
takes more neurons
than
there's atoms in
the cpu". but
this is a
total cop-out, i can string
together an infinity of computers, as bitcoin has shown.
mircea_popescu: which is how men ended up in
the workforce in
the first place
mircea_popescu: diana_coman and
the answer is obvious : something else dun menstruate.
diana_coman: I guess
the
thing is
that if one abandons
this ideal of always
true,
the question
that arises immediately is why
then not
train actual people in
the first place instead of building something else
to..train like people
Framedragger: is
that related
to
this currently discussed notion of "insisting on hard non-failing
truth == unrealistic autism" (with which i agree)?
Framedragger: mircea_popescu: do you mean Dolly
the cloned sheep? i've heard of it, but only just
diana_coman: the rule-based
thing is an atrocity and prolog urgh
diana_coman: it's actually part of why I quickly became disenchanted with
the whole AI school (well, all of
them really): I don't get why
the focus on *always right* when no living intelligence (which is supposedly
the model in any case) is *always* right
mircea_popescu: Framedragger i have yet
to see him
talk other
than by himself in a room. were you hear for
the discussion of brin
the elder ?
mircea_popescu: if it's a fucking
tool why
the fuck are youtrying
to build a 3mn loc item in it!
diana_coman: so
that last part might be
the
trouble,
true
mircea_popescu: diana_coman more importantly :
they are
tools, programmed as
tools, expected
to deliver untool likethings.
diana_coman: imo you are on
to something else
there; computers at
the moment are
tools, hence programmed like
tools and
this is not something one can solve at programming level (hey, let's start
training computers now and
they will learn!)
a111: Logged on 2016-06-22 04:02 mircea_popescu: yeah. but
that doesn't change
the fact
the ~only intellectual in
the entire north of
the continent is
that old jew
talking
to himself in a room.
mircea_popescu: anyway. currently computers seem
to me a sort of AB - alpha.
Framedragger: (e.g. i agree with chomsky's "There is a notion of success ... which I
think is novel in
the history of science. It interprets success as approximating unanalyzed data." which does indeed suck.)
☟︎ mircea_popescu: and yes,
the google "ai" rule based bs is giving a bad name
to all
this, but abstracting
the usg.idiots for a second, before we
throw out
the bath
mircea_popescu: now, it is real easy
to grant
that "machine can't resolve because irl it
takes more neurons
than
there's atoms in
the cpu". but
this is a
total cop-out, i can string
together an infinity of computers, as bitcoin has shown.
☟︎ mircea_popescu: as in
the joke with
the romanian police and
the bear, "give me
this djinn for a week"
mircea_popescu: ask me "with what", get
to see my samuel l jackson face
mircea_popescu: (ftr,
this school of "Slave should be
tool - simple as possible" exists, and its product is outrageous and ridiculous by
turns.
they do
think
themselves "the real" bdsm people
though, against
the method-acting larger set (hint : if
the word "scene" is mentioned - method actors))
Framedragger: ..prolly easier
to wait for generic a.i. and
then just have it mesh with brainz, heh.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform my slavegirls aren't
tools,
they're people. why should my computers be
tools ? i've only
two hands.
Framedragger: asciilifeform: so i've heard! never approached it, sadly /
to my detriment
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform "can't possibly mean" is
totally a
thing.
mircea_popescu: as proven by
the fact
that
the girls in question start acting like one even if not specifically
trained
to be one.
Framedragger: 1. all
turtles are green. 2. bob is a
turtle. 3. bob is red. => spit out contradiction / choice of rejecting one of
these. if additional premises are made which connect
to
the former ones,
then decide which
to reject quantitatively, or something.
mircea_popescu: because
the major
trick here is - what i say isn't ACTUALLY ambiguous. it just requires very fine interpretation, which meshes well with a machine. in any case meshes well with
the epistemic process
that makes people engineers,
a111: Logged on 2016-06-23 14:13 mircea_popescu: it's shocking how little
the school system does
to
teach anyone anything. but anyway - what
the program MEANS should be decided on
the basis of what it can't possibly fucking mean,
Framedragger: ..some kind of generic knowledge
tree processing
thing / semantic systems. someone must have made a small stab at
this.. i mean
there are natural language processing
toolkits which build up context and work beyond straightforward syntax.. i don't know how well
they are doing
mircea_popescu: which is why i'm saying,
there's not much actionable here. but just because i dunno what
to do with it doesn't mean i don't get drunk and dream.
mircea_popescu: Framedragger it's clear
to me
that in present computing paradigm it is outright impossible.
mircea_popescu: and no,
this isn't cheap "do what i mean"-ism. when i say "the flower is blue and round is
the sky",
the notion
that
the flower is ROUND is invalidated not by what I mean, but by what everything means.
Framedragger: the case with rsa keys - it would be very difficult
to write it up / interpret it as per your idea
though, i
think? unless
the case was explicitly declared before, and
that would break
the whole idea (negative meaning, not (only) positive/exhaustive meaning)
Framedragger: yeah
that's a different point, sure, and a good one it seems
mircea_popescu: and i don't
think it is ever acceptable for machine
to make shitty rsa keys "because
that's what i
told it
to".
mircea_popescu: it's shocking how little
the school system does
to
teach anyone anything. but anyway - what
the program MEANS should be decided on
the basis of what it can't possibly fucking mean,
☟︎ mircea_popescu: when i
teach my not-so-new-anymore slavegirls how
to
think, a large chunk consists of "interpreting what is said" which all revolves around "build
tree of all possible meanings, prune all meanings contradicted".
mircea_popescu: that's kind-of a different level
though. what does it even mean "to fail".
mircea_popescu: if a software project did as much importing as
the average
trilema article does, it'd be openssh.
mircea_popescu: which allows me
to say intelligent
things in such a way
that pyramids many sayings deep can be effortlessly constructed, retain meaning and even nurture new meaning, and in general have all
the attributes of art.
mircea_popescu: MOST of
the power of
trilema relies on exactly
this,
that I don't have
to IFDEF and DECLARE and whatnot.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform ok,
the "fucking hell who ever heard of a program
that wants you
to specify what you don't know" essay. i recall it, and imo it is very much substantial
to my complaint.
mircea_popescu: actually, ima have
to
translate
this. will put on
trilema in a second. also gotta re-read
this naggum... you folks have overwhelmed my real
time processing, ima go bsod now and bbl.
Framedragger: asciilifeform:
tackling godel's
two
theorems is another kind/level of undertaking, prolly...