News:

Welcome to our site!

Main Menu

How many GODS do you have?

Started by Arik, May 08, 2019, 08:42:34 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Arik

Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 14, 2019, 09:09:55 AM
Except NDE's not death...


I beg your pardon......

Gee, I didn't know that you are a qualified doctor......
So, so sorry....

Only a small thing Jos.
Do you mind to show me your qualification as a doctor?
Is not that I do not believe you.
Of course I do believe you but is rather for writing it down in my book of record because my memory is quite bad so I do not do the mistake to call you a pretender-claimant in future.

All my fault.
When you were born, you were crying and everyone around you was smiling. Live your life so that when you die, you’re the one smiling and everyone around you is crying. Tulsi Das

Arik

Quote from: Hydra009 on August 13, 2019, 09:52:33 AM
Newsflash: it doesn't.  Period.  The fact that you still think this argument holds water is really quite embarrassing since you obviously don't find it at all convincing when it's used to support a conclusion you don't like.


A conclusion does not necessary carry the truth.

Within this limited universe everything move and change by the second so what was true yesterday is not longer true now and what is correct now will be cast in the rubbish bin of history tomorrow.

The only conclusion that hold 100% truth lies with the master of the whole existence.
When you were born, you were crying and everyone around you was smiling. Live your life so that when you die, you’re the one smiling and everyone around you is crying. Tulsi Das

aileron

Quote from: Baruch on August 13, 2019, 11:42:31 PM
It is, if the motherboard wrote the software ;-)  That would be magic.  Never has happened.

Evolution.

Have you ever worked with genetic programming? At the risk of oversimplifying, genetic programming simulates natural selection to improve computation of extremely complex problems. The code literally mutates randomly and if the result is better it survives. If not, it's "killed". From there new mutations and selection improve the computation.

It's no exaggeration to state that more often than not there's not a single human on the planet who understands why the resulting computation works better than the starting one.

Sure, you can object that it's all human built, but the resulting computation is not. This is something we give minutes or hours to compute. Give nature 13 billion years, and we'll talk about what nature can do.
Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room! -- President Merkin Muffley

My mom was a religious fundamentalist. Plus, she didn't have a mouth. It's an unusual combination. -- Bender Bending Rodriguez

Arik

Quote from: aileron on August 14, 2019, 10:16:44 AM
Evolution.

Have you ever worked with genetic programming? At the risk of oversimplifying, genetic programming simulates natural selection to improve computation of extremely complex problems. The code literally mutates randomly and if the result is better it survives. If not, it's "killed". From there new mutations and selection improve the computation.

It's no exaggeration to state that more often than not there's not a single human on the planet who understands why the resulting computation works better than the starting one.

Sure, you can object that it's all human built, but the resulting computation is not. This is something we give minutes or hours to compute. Give nature 13 billion years, and we'll talk about what nature can do.


Oh, very good to see an expert.

Would you be so kind to explain to me what NATURE is?
Thanks.




(red color mine)
When you were born, you were crying and everyone around you was smiling. Live your life so that when you die, you’re the one smiling and everyone around you is crying. Tulsi Das

josephpalazzo

Quote from: Arik on August 14, 2019, 10:02:04 AM

I beg your pardon......

Gee, I didn't know that you are a qualified doctor......


The AMA says so. Get real.

Arik

Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 14, 2019, 10:27:46 AM
The AMA says so. Get real.


Very well mate so now I can see your qualifications.

Thanks.
When you were born, you were crying and everyone around you was smiling. Live your life so that when you die, you’re the one smiling and everyone around you is crying. Tulsi Das

josephpalazzo

Quote from: Arik on August 14, 2019, 10:40:34 AM

Very well mate so now I can see your qualifications.

Thanks.

Liar. You can't see anything. You're blind.

Arik

Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 14, 2019, 10:43:44 AM
Liar. You can't see anything. You're blind.

Liar?

Why?
All I want is to see that you are a real qualified doctor not a pretender.
Do I ask too much?
When you were born, you were crying and everyone around you was smiling. Live your life so that when you die, you’re the one smiling and everyone around you is crying. Tulsi Das

aileron

Quote from: Arik on August 14, 2019, 10:50:37 AM
Liar?

Why?
All I want is to see that you are a real qualified doctor not a pretender.
Do I ask too much?

Appeal to authority much? You don't need to be a doctor to know that "near death" and "death" are not the same things, BTW.
Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room! -- President Merkin Muffley

My mom was a religious fundamentalist. Plus, she didn't have a mouth. It's an unusual combination. -- Bender Bending Rodriguez

Arik

Quote from: aileron on August 14, 2019, 10:52:30 AM
Appeal to authority much? You don't need to be a doctor to know that "near death" and "death" are not the same things, BTW.


Near death is just a name given.
That does not mean that the bloke is not dead.

Names given do not necessary represent the truth and if the doctor confirm the real death then the name value given is just meaningless.
When you were born, you were crying and everyone around you was smiling. Live your life so that when you die, you’re the one smiling and everyone around you is crying. Tulsi Das

aileron

Quote from: Arik on August 14, 2019, 11:15:55 AM

Near death is just a name given.
That does not mean that the bloke is not dead.

Names given do not necessary represent the truth and if the doctor confirm the real death then the name value given is just meaningless.

So we've established that:

1) You're only talking about actual deaths, not near death experiences.
2) You're only talking about cases where the death has not been pronounced by mistake.

Okay, go. Find cases where you can confirm 1 and 2 and let's go from there.
Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room! -- President Merkin Muffley

My mom was a religious fundamentalist. Plus, she didn't have a mouth. It's an unusual combination. -- Bender Bending Rodriguez

josephpalazzo

Quote from: Arik on August 14, 2019, 10:50:37 AM
Liar?

Why?
All I want is to see that you are a real qualified doctor not a pretender.
Do I ask too much?

This was already posted to you. But the fraud that you are needs to be told again:

"The National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws in 1980 formulated the Uniform Determination of Death Act. It states that: "An individual who has sustained either (1) irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory functions, or (2) irreversible cessation of all functions of the entire brain, including the brain stem is dead. A determination of death must be made in accordance with accepted medical standards." This definition was approved by the American Medical Association in 1980 and by the American Bar Association in 1981."

https://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=33438

Baruch

#1107
Quote from: aileron on August 14, 2019, 10:16:44 AM
Evolution.

Have you ever worked with genetic programming? At the risk of oversimplifying, genetic programming simulates natural selection to improve computation of extremely complex problems. The code literally mutates randomly and if the result is better it survives. If not, it's "killed". From there new mutations and selection improve the computation.

It's no exaggeration to state that more often than not there's not a single human on the planet who understands why the resulting computation works better than the starting one.

Sure, you can object that it's all human built, but the resulting computation is not. This is something we give minutes or hours to compute. Give nature 13 billion years, and we'll talk about what nature can do.

I know what it is.  I am degreed in computer science BTW.  I know from computer science, in what ways it can work, or not work.  Now I won't try to oversimplify for you ;-)  Basically, a purely random string of binary digits, has no meaning.  Meaning comes about with a pseudo-random string of binary digits, that has an accompanying interpretation.  Basically similar to a crypt/decrypt of a human communication.  If an encryption produced a truly random output, it couldn't be decrypted.  If the language behind the original text had no meaning, then whether encrypted or not it is useless.

So what is genetic programming?  You start with a carefully selected pseudo-random number (say that encodes some semantic network).  For instance, a three level beginning neural net.  But you could choose something else.  The beginning state of the computation has to not be purely random, and it has to have an interpretation (in computer semantics, not necessarily in human terms).  The execution of the base algorithm (such as the evolution of a neural net under data input) then modifies the original configuration into a new configuration.  If things are designed well, then the final configuration has an interpretation under the same semantics as the original configuration (say OCRT).  Of course the computer doesn't know what is being done, is the transformation of a fuzzy text into a less fuzzy archive text.

The base algorithm can vary, but it isn't a random set of binary digits either.  It has to be pseudorandom.  A genetic algorithm is a different scheme than a three level neural net, but the principles are the same.  Any execution of input data by a Turing machine, into output data is a variation on the same basic routine.  A Turing machine, in computational complexity theory, cannot produce a purely random string.  At most it can produce what is called a "computable number".  Those are transcendental, but only a proper subset of the transcendental numbers.  The other transcendental numbers are no computable, they are purely random.  It is ultimately deterministic.  A non-deterministic system can only be simulated, not emulated, unless one creates an "oracle".

A non-deterministic execution is achieved by a physical event, not software event, that is outside the scope of what we are discussing.  It is an "oracle" in Turing theory.  In NSA type work, it involves a purely physical random event (say quantum) that can generate a seed, that is then used to build a longer key.  As long a the seed is purely random (out of a very large set of potential seeds), then the generation of a longer key by computation method, is not a weakness.  A basic version of this would be a purely random number being used to pick a long "one time pad" out of a large list of them.  Using a "one time pad" only once, and never again, is perfect encryption.  So this can be approached to whatever level of hardness one wants.  I have worked with those kinds of systems.

So basically, in this model, one can transform an initial state (plain text) into a final state (crypt text) using an algorithm that is pseudorandom number.  And one can make the generation of the key to the pseudorandom number, as hard as one likes.  So again, a very great extrapolation of human intervention, from the actual execution of code.  Many levels of indirection deep.  But not infinitely deep.  So Lady Ada Lovelace continues to be vindicated over Alan Turning.  The machine can't do more than what we tell it to do.  And it can all be done by pencil and paper rather than by computer, if we are patient enough.  Alan Turing (in his Turing Test) lowered the requirement, to match what a Turing machine can do.  A thought experiment, or cheat.

This is why, Tay the Nazi chatbot went off course.  And why Google's experiment with two mutually interacting chatbots was stopped:

https://www.pymnts.com/news/artificial-intelligence/2018/google-chatbots-facebook-voice-assistant-smart-speaker/

Basically as I see it, at some level, they had the various pseudorandom bits working.  But the execution moved from a system that had an interpretation to one that did not.  Which is to say, not only did Google not know how the chat-bot-coffee-clatch drew conclusions, but they didn't even know what it was reporting after a period of time.  The output was pseudorandom in a way nobody could figure out.  Aka useless, like baby gibberish.

So yeah, in a subject I know something about, you could learn from me.  I am happy to learn in areas where I am deficient (if they exist ;-)).

As any Dilbert fan knows, there is a huge cultural gap between engineering, programming, marketing and management.  They don't even speak the same languages.  This happened multiple times before in the AI hype market.  I was a ground zero during the collapse of AI in the mid 80s.  Member of AAAI and went to the UCLA conference in 1985.  We were going to take over the world ;-)  With LISP.

Of course some people can't learn from experience, theirs or others.  Mostly because they are management or marketing ;-(  Those two groups recycle the same frauds every decade of so, and probably innocently, because they weren't involved in the previous cycle, or never understood it.

So what did I work on?  Had to do with encryption.  Details?  A felony to share out.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

josephpalazzo

Comparing genetic programming to computer programming??? Every biologists must be rolling their eyes...

Baruch

Quote from: aileron on August 14, 2019, 10:52:30 AM
Appeal to authority much? You don't need to be a doctor to know that "near death" and "death" are not the same things, BTW.

Where is your Dr degree?  During the 19th century, about 1/5 people were buried alive.  Because coma is so obvious.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.