Harry is stated to only have access to about half of the easier parts of the sequences.
I assume the timeless physics sequence is one of the parts he doesn't have access to...
I can no longer conceive that there might really be a universal time, which is somehow "moving" from the past to the future. This now seems like nonsense.
Something like Barbour's timeless physics has to be true, or I'm in trouble: I have forgotten how to imagine a universe that has "real genuine time" in it.
From this I read that Harry's mistake is the notion that there are things that "[haven't] happened yet".
Is the source code to Hypnobot available? You seem to make some pretty strong claims about its effectiveness, but I'm not about to grind Omegle chats until I run in to it.
Another New Yorker here showing interest.
http://media.caltech.edu/press_releases/13492
... (read more)To investigate the impact of social context on IQ, the researchers divided a pool of 70 subjects into groups of five and gave each individual a computer-based IQ test. After each question, an on-screen ranking showed the subjects how well they were performing relative to others in their group and how well one other person in the group was faring. All of the subjects had previously taken a paper-and-pencil IQ test, and were matched with the rest of the group so that they would each be expected to perform similarly on an IQ test.
At the outset, all of the subjects did worse than expected on this "ranked group IQ task." But some
Why can't a vocaloid have a personality? Does Gregory House have a personality?
I think the idea of "Miku" is a stand in for a large group of people, just like "Google" is. I also don't think many people have a problem with personifying Google.
For example, if their argument is that it is impossible to judge another culture's activities as being 'evil', I offer up the idea that it's part of my culture to repeatedly thwap people I disagree with on the head with a stick, and thus they have no justification for telling me to stop.
Not being able to judge another culture's activities as intrinsically evil isn't the same as having to like everything everyone else does.
I don't think your "stick test" is worth anything: the person being hit can invoke desire utilitarianism as their justification and still not claim that your action is "evil".
OpenCog is open source anyway: anything Goertzel can do can be done by anyone else. If Goertzel didn't think it was safe to run, what's stopping someone else from running it?
I find it a little strange that people never talk about this.
Ignore, for a moment, your personal assessment of Goertzel's chance of creating AGI. What would you do, or what would you want done, if you suspected an open source project was capable of succeeding? Even if the developers acknowledged the notion of FAI, there's nothing stopping any random person on the internet from cloning their repository and doing whatever they like with the code.