= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
timtyler comments on Less Wrong: Open Thread, September 2010 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (610)
Don't do that - instead associate programs with sensory input streams.
Ok, but how?
A stream of sense data is essentially equivalent to a binary stream - the associated programs are the ones that output that stream.
Still don't get it. Let's say cards are being put in front of my face, and all I'm getting is their color. I can reliability distinguish the colors here "http://www.webspresso.com/color.htm". How do I associate a sequence of cards with a string? It doesn't seem like there is any canonical way of doing this. Maybe it won't matter that much in the end, but are there better and worse ways of starting?
Just so: the exact representation used is usually not that critical.
If as you say you are using Solomonoff induction, the next step is to compress it - so any fancy encoding scheme you use will probably be stripped right off again.
If you really can only distinguish those 255 colors, then you could associate each color with a single unique byte, and a sequence of n cards becomes a single bitstring with n*8 bits in it. For additional flavor, add some sort of compression.
This is so elementary that I must be misunderstanding you somehow.