You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Alicorn comments on Bayesian Epistemology vs Popper - Less Wrong Discussion

-1 Post author: curi 06 April 2011 11:50PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (226)
Tags: epistemology popper jaynes

Comments (226)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Alicorn 07 April 2011 06:12:49PM 4 points [-]

gmail's spam filter does not have degrees of belief or belief.

It has things which you could call by those words if you really wanted to. But it wouldn't make them into the same things those words mean when referring to people.

Augh, this reminded me of a quote that I can't seem to find based on my tentative memory of its component words... it was something to the effect that we anthropomorphize computers and talk about them "knowing" things or "communicating" with each other, and some people think that's wrong and they don't really do those things, and the quote-ee was of the opinion that computers were clarifying what we meant by those concepts all along. Anybody know what I'm talking about?

Comment author: curi 07 April 2011 06:37:10PM 1 point [-]

To be clear, I think computers can do those things and AIs will, and that will help clarify the concepts a lot.

But I don't think that microsoft word does it. Nor any game "AI" today. Nor gmail's spam filter which just does mindlessly math.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit