From: CyTG (email@example.com)
Date: Wed Oct 17 2007 - 09:35:18 MDT
I dont get it, why are you guys addressing this super ai in terms of simple
rule based behavior, i think the rule based expert systems outplayed its
role as godfather to gai a long time ago!
You might as well look upon this "ai" system, as an highly irregular
construct, something(or someone) that seems to survive going by intuition
alone ... like, say, a woman. ;-).
I believe there will always be stuff to process, consider introspection, by
definition of its recursive nature, relations, weights, associations -
whatever an gai will be built upon - will always be in a dynmaic state,
right down to the least significant decimal (if there is a such, problem
I know boredom is desirable to me(well some times), my very best ideas are
spawned out of boredom..(i realize that what constitutes a good idea is ..
very relative, but i do think i've got some good stuff, some relating
somewhat to this subject as well)
On 10/17/07, charles griffiths <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Hi Bryan,
> Boredom is evolved behavior. When you're a collection of processes running
> on computronium, you don't get cpu time unless you have something to work
> on. Why would you?
> Time currently spent in boredom could be spent in other ways (reliability
> measures like maintenance or redundancy, efficiency measures, or whatever),
> unless boredom turns out to be desirable for some reason.
> Charles Griffiths
> *Bryan Bishop <email@example.com>* wrote:
> On Monday 15 October 2007 23:20, Harry Chesley wrote:
> > Perhaps boredom is evolution's way of detecting and avoiding infinite
> > loops.
> (Is it safe to talk of evolution like that?)
> Statistically, the redundant mental cycles hit ups and downs on a graph,
> presumably where the more intelligent sophonts (sentients/progs) would
> be the ones to 'gravitate' more strongly to the x-axis which for each
> mind may or may not have a special offset for their 'normal mode of
> operation'. An example of a 'down' period might be a multigenerational
> ship passing the void between edges of neighboring galaxies.
> Ideally, there is a way to control redundant mental cycles and
> perpetually keep us in an "up" or at least climbing a latter and
> hitting "save" points to reset the x-axis to the higher points.
> Thoughts? I am still interested in coming up with an information
> theoretic proof of the (lack of?) inevitability of boredom, i.e. to
> show that there is in fact a way to always have something new to work
> with for some definition of 'new'. (Some already claim "there is
> nothing new under the sun.")
> - Bryan
> Check out
> <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51201/*http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html;_ylc=X3oDMTE5NWVzZGVyBF9TAzk3MTA3MDc2BHNlYwNtYWlsdGFncwRzbGsDYXV0b3MtbmV3Y2Fy%0A>the hottest 2008 models today at Yahoo! Autos.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:58 MDT