| --- Log opened Mon Jun 13 00:00:07 2011 | ||
| -!- augur [~augur@208.58.6.161] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 00:01 | |
| -!- alystair [alystair@24-246-14-18.cable.teksavvy.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] | 02:12 | |
| -!- augur [~augur@208.58.6.161] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] | 02:26 | |
| -!- augur [~augur@208.58.6.161] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 02:26 | |
| -!- jennicide [jen@173-29-174-114.client.mchsi.com] has quit [Read error: No route to host] | 02:35 | |
| -!- jennicide [jen@173-29-174-114.client.mchsi.com] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 02:35 | |
| dbolser | can anyone point me at that video hosting site with good subtitle editing functionality? | 02:38 |
|---|---|---|
| dbolser | I was linked to a vid on that site in here about 6 months ago | 02:38 |
| Utopiah | http://www.universalsubtitles.org ? | 02:39 |
| -!- jennicide [jen@173-29-174-114.client.mchsi.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] | 02:40 | |
| -!- jennicide [jen@173-29-174-114.client.mchsi.com] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 02:41 | |
| dbolser | Utopiah: your fast! | 02:46 |
| dbolser | thanks | 02:47 |
| dbolser | looks right, which is all I need :-D | 02:48 |
| -!- archels [~neuralnet@541ED8B0.cm-5-7d.dynamic.ziggo.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] | 02:53 | |
| -!- archels [~neuralnet@541ED8B0.cm-5-7d.dynamic.ziggo.nl] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 03:05 | |
| -!- jennicide [jen@173-29-174-114.client.mchsi.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] | 03:20 | |
| -!- jennicide [jen@173-29-174-114.client.mchsi.com] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 03:21 | |
| -!- lumos [~lumos@92.20.112.33] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 03:52 | |
| -!- klafka [~textual@cpe-69-205-70-55.rochester.res.rr.com] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 04:14 | |
| -!- uniqanomaly [~ua@dynamic-78-8-90-161.ssp.dialog.net.pl] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 04:24 | |
| -!- lumos [~lumos@92.20.112.33] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] | 04:34 | |
| -!- lumos [~lumos@92.20.112.33] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 04:43 | |
| -!- klafka [~textual@cpe-69-205-70-55.rochester.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.] | 06:12 | |
| -!- QuantumG [~qg@rtfm.insomnia.org] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] | 06:34 | |
| -!- eridu [~eridu@gateway/tor-sasl/eridu] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 09:17 | |
| -!- mayko [~mayko@71-22-217-151.gar.clearwire-wmx.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] | 10:01 | |
| -!- mayko [~mayko@71-22-217-151.gar.clearwire-wmx.net] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 10:05 | |
| -!- uniqanomaly [~ua@dynamic-78-8-90-161.ssp.dialog.net.pl] has quit [Quit: uniqanomaly] | 12:19 | |
| -!- eudoxia [~eudoxia@r190-133-10-21.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 12:46 | |
| -!- eudoxia [~eudoxia@r190-133-10-21.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has quit [Quit: Leaving] | 12:58 | |
| kanzure | senate.gov too? http://lulzsecurity.com/releases/senate.gov.txt | 13:10 |
| -!- archels [~neuralnet@541ED8B0.cm-5-7d.dynamic.ziggo.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] | 14:34 | |
| -!- archels [~neuralnet@541ED8B0.cm-5-7d.dynamic.ziggo.nl] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 14:45 | |
| -!- nsh_ [~nsh@cpc3-broo4-0-0-cust997.14-2.cable.virginmedia.com] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 14:47 | |
| augur | kanzure: ping | 14:52 |
| -!- QuantumG [~qg@rtfm.insomnia.org] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 14:54 | |
| nsh_ | what's new? | 15:03 |
| -!- lumos [~lumos@92.20.112.33] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] | 15:11 | |
| kanzure | augur: pong | 15:15 |
| kanzure | nsh_: pong | 15:16 |
| augur | kanzure: is there a working group here for AI? | 15:16 |
| kanzure | here? what? | 15:17 |
| kanzure | i think that ai is possible and that everyone working on it basically sucks, except for the whole brain emulation folks who might or might not be making progress | 15:18 |
| * nsh_ shrugs | 15:19 | |
| nsh_ | i don't believe in artifice :) | 15:20 |
| kanzure | nsh_: i've been geeking out about http://diyhpl.us/~bryan/papers2/neuro/ultrasound/ | 15:20 |
| nsh_ | kanzure, what are you imagining to do with ultrasound? | 15:21 |
| nsh_ | general biochemical tinkering? | 15:21 |
| kanzure | transcranial ultrasound for stimulation and/or brain melting | 15:21 |
| nsh_ | mmm | 15:22 |
| nsh_ | will look into this | 15:30 |
| nsh_ | bbl | 15:30 |
| -!- nsh_ [~nsh@cpc3-broo4-0-0-cust997.14-2.cable.virginmedia.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] | 15:34 | |
| -!- PixelScum [~PixelScum@ip98-177-175-88.ph.ph.cox.net] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 15:53 | |
| -!- Drakkar [~PixelScum@ip98-177-175-88.ph.ph.cox.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] | 15:56 | |
| -!- eridu [~eridu@gateway/tor-sasl/eridu] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds] | 16:02 | |
| -!- klafka [~textual@cpe-69-205-70-55.rochester.res.rr.com] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 16:11 | |
| -!- Avarice [~nsh@cpc1-cowc1-0-0-cust844.14-2.cable.virginmedia.com] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 16:16 | |
| -!- Avarice [~nsh@cpc1-cowc1-0-0-cust844.14-2.cable.virginmedia.com] has quit [Client Quit] | 16:19 | |
| -!- Avarice [~nsh@cpc1-cowc1-0-0-cust844.14-2.cable.virginmedia.com] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 16:20 | |
| -!- Avarice is now known as nsh_ | 16:20 | |
| -!- nsh_ [~nsh@cpc1-cowc1-0-0-cust844.14-2.cable.virginmedia.com] has quit [Changing host] | 16:22 | |
| -!- nsh_ [~nsh@wikipedia/nsh] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 16:22 | |
| -!- nsh_ is now known as nsh | 16:22 | |
| -!- alystair [alystair@24-246-14-18.cable.teksavvy.com] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 16:27 | |
| -!- mayko [~mayko@71-22-217-151.gar.clearwire-wmx.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] | 16:44 | |
| jrayhawk | "< aristid> instead they should grant tax exemptions." huh, that's not a bad idea | 17:10 |
| kanzure | seems marginally better than my "immediate nullification of all patents" plan | 17:12 |
| QuantumG | you just want it both ways. Don't like the restriction of patents, don't respect the necessity for trade secrets without patents. | 17:18 |
| kanzure | every product should have its information/recipe available | 17:19 |
| QuantumG | there ya go. | 17:22 |
| -!- eridu [~eridu@gateway/tor-sasl/eridu] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 17:24 | |
| -!- mayko [~mayko@71-22-217-151.gar.clearwire-wmx.net] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 17:41 | |
| kanzure | emokit w/ websockets http://makemyactionschainreactions.net/eeg/ | 17:46 |
| -!- PixelScum [~PixelScum@ip98-177-175-88.ph.ph.cox.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] | 18:39 | |
| -!- PixelScum [~PixelScum@ip98-177-175-88.ph.ph.cox.net] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 18:39 | |
| fenn | intellectual property tax makes a lot of sense | 18:43 |
| fenn | if we're going to go down the IP road | 18:43 |
| fenn | or secrecy tax, whatever | 18:44 |
| kanzure | haha if all your other property can be taxed.. why not IP :P | 19:00 |
| kanzure | but unfortunately this will be misconstrued as something to tack on, not as an alternative to limited monopolies | 19:00 |
| kanzure | (tax incentives vs. intellectual property tax) | 19:00 |
| augur | kanzure: so no. there is no AIWG here. shame! | 19:04 |
| kanzure | aiwg? | 19:04 |
| kanzure | we have people that get excited about whole brain emulation, | 19:04 |
| kanzure | i think that's close enough. | 19:04 |
| augur | hrmph. | 19:05 |
| kanzure | what would you want | 19:08 |
| -!- PixelScum [~PixelScum@ip98-177-175-88.ph.ph.cox.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] | 19:11 | |
| -!- PixelScum [~PixelScum@ip98-177-175-88.ph.ph.cox.net] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 19:11 | |
| kanzure | is stross' "rule 34" really about rule 34? | 19:34 |
| -!- eridu [~eridu@gateway/tor-sasl/eridu] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds] | 19:39 | |
| nsh | askance | 19:41 |
| kanzure | is that a dance style | 19:42 |
| nsh | it's a rare spice, depreciated in modern cuisine | 19:43 |
| -!- mrtrousers [5339b5dd@gateway/web/freenode/ip.83.57.181.221] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 20:12 | |
| -!- jennicide [jen@173-29-174-114.client.mchsi.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] | 20:15 | |
| -!- jennicide [~jen@173-29-174-114.client.mchsi.com] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 20:15 | |
| -!- AJollyLife [~quassel@unaffiliated/ajollylife] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] | 20:16 | |
| foucist | she glanced at his penis in askance | 20:20 |
| kanzure | foucist: RAGE | 20:21 |
| kanzure | http://heybryan.org/shots/2011-06-13-2249-arenasnow-typeracer.png | 20:21 |
| kanzure | <-- raped :( | 20:22 |
| foucist | just an example of proper usage | 20:25 |
| foucist | of the word | 20:25 |
| foucist | in a sentence | 20:25 |
| foucist | heh | 20:25 |
| kanzure | ? | 20:25 |
| foucist | kanzure: someone beat you? about time | 20:25 |
| foucist | (askance) | 20:25 |
| -!- jenzebubble [jen@173-29-174-114.client.mchsi.com] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 20:35 | |
| -!- jennicide [~jen@173-29-174-114.client.mchsi.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] | 20:38 | |
| fenn | "The other element is found in the stenotype, that somewhat disconcerting device encountered usually at public meetings. A girl strokes its keys languidly and looks about the room and sometimes at the speaker with a disquieting gaze. Combine these two elements, let the Vocoder run the stenotype, and the result is a machine which types when talked to." | 20:40 |
| fenn | 197 wpm, is that with a querty keyboard? | 20:41 |
| kanzure | yes | 20:44 |
| kanzure | the dude has arms of steel | 20:44 |
| kanzure | http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uf0hrleDE-E&NR=1 | 20:44 |
| fenn | that the input box clears every word makes comparison difficult | 20:49 |
| * kanzure is facebook friends with sean :( | 20:51 | |
| kanzure | if you can't beat him.. join him | 20:51 |
| fenn | typaholics anonymous | 20:52 |
| kanzure | "But my true obsession in high school was being statistician of the Mensa Scrabble-by-Mail SIG, where I was also a top ten player before I stopped playing upon entering college" | 20:53 |
| kanzure | what | 20:53 |
| fenn | do intelligent people use bigger words? | 20:53 |
| fenn | calculemus! | 20:53 |
| kanzure | 'mensa scrabble-by-mail SIG' | 20:54 |
| kanzure | i can't stop laughing :( | 20:54 |
| fenn | i was reading julian assange's blog earlier today | 20:54 |
| fenn | he has this whole long diatribe about how intelligent people are socially outcast because they can't communicate with normals | 20:54 |
| fenn | referring specifically to 150+ iq | 20:55 |
| kanzure | bah my wpm is higher than that iq! | 20:55 |
| kanzure | (i don't know what this means) | 20:55 |
| fenn | i dont think i'd have the patience necessary for x-by-mail games | 20:55 |
| kanzure | hey does 'units' handle iq | 20:56 |
| fenn | no | 20:57 |
| fenn | iq is based on percentile relative to the population at large | 20:57 |
| fenn | the average is always exactly 100 | 20:57 |
| * nsh mumbles something about relative-state | 20:58 | |
| fenn | units doesn't do things that change arbitrarily, except for some currency conversions (which i think i s a bad idea anyway) | 20:58 |
| fenn | "almost all IQ tests adhere to the assignment of 15 IQ points to each standard deviation" | 21:00 |
| fenn | it would be much better if they just said the mental age, me thinks | 21:01 |
| kanzure | so our friend the 'smartest man in the world' is, what, 12 standard deviations out? | 21:01 |
| kanzure | unlikely.. | 21:01 |
| fenn | the test breaks down at high end because there arent enough to draw a baseline from when designing the test | 21:02 |
| fenn | if you get 100 out of 100 questions right, what's your score? | 21:03 |
| fenn | hm, this is a long wikipedia entry | 21:04 |
| ybit | aiwg? | 21:04 |
| ybit | augur^ | 21:04 |
| augur | O_O | 21:06 |
| ybit | don't give me that face | 21:06 |
| augur | ybit: AI working group | 21:06 |
| ybit | explain yourself :) | 21:06 |
| ybit | okay | 21:06 |
| fenn | "The accepted best measure of g is Raven's Progressive Matrices which is a test of visual reasoning." | 21:08 |
| fenn | is it just me or does that statement not make any sense | 21:08 |
| fenn | g is supposed to be "general" not "visual" | 21:08 |
| fenn | i guess it's accepted because it's culturally neutral | 21:09 |
| augur | ybit: i want to work on a project to design weak AGI around more formal techniques, but atypical ones | 21:09 |
| augur | so i was curious if there was a wg here i could poke at | 21:09 |
| ybit | #opencog | 21:10 |
| fenn | augur: i want to pooh pooh your idea but you haven't told us enough | 21:10 |
| augur | fenn: im not aiming for anything strong, just something fairly agent-ish that can engage relatively fluidly in natural language. | 21:11 |
| fenn | but seriously i dont think any good will come of a system that does not use advanced statistics and massively parallel computation | 21:11 |
| augur | the intention isnt for anything major, fenn. | 21:11 |
| -!- mayko [~mayko@71-22-217-151.gar.clearwire-wmx.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] | 21:11 | |
| augur | i mean, honestly, i dont think that statistics will help, and im not convince that parallelism is truly necessary, but | 21:12 |
| augur | thats beside the point | 21:12 |
| fenn | ... One must think "divergently" of many possible solutions to a given, often ill-defined, problem; the relative scarcity or abundance of various resources, present and projected individual or group needs... | 21:12 |
| augur | sure thats fine. it doesnt necessitate parallelism tho | 21:13 |
| fenn | what is the intention then? | 21:13 |
| augur | i mean, im all for parallelism. its computationally quite nice, if you can get it to work | 21:13 |
| fenn | megahal engages fluidly in natural language... it just doesn't say anything sensical most of the time | 21:14 |
| augur | but its not magically more powerful. its equivalent to serial processing, so i see the parallelism issue as a distraction. | 21:14 |
| augur | brainlike "parallelism" on the other hand is a different issue | 21:14 |
| augur | ive never heard of megahal. ill check it out. | 21:14 |
| fenn | it's only equivalent to serial processing if the separate threads don't interact at all | 21:14 |
| augur | oh yes, one of these things. | 21:14 |
| fenn | markov model irc bot | 21:15 |
| augur | fenn: no, serial machines can simulate any parallel machine, so they're completely equivalent. | 21:15 |
| augur | parallelism is just useful for certain problem structures. | 21:15 |
| augur | further, interaction of threads is a concurrency issue not a parallelism issue. tho the two are often conflated, they're quite distinct. | 21:16 |
| fenn | and happens to be the only progress in computers at the moment | 21:16 |
| augur | http://existentialtype.wordpress.com/2011/03/17/parallelism-is-not-concurrency/ | 21:16 |
| augur | the only progress how | 21:16 |
| foucist | topological computation is the future | 21:17 |
| foucist | fixes all the problems w/ parallelism | 21:17 |
| fenn | there hasn't been significant improvement in clock speeds for years | 21:17 |
| foucist | for certain classes of problems anyways | 21:17 |
| augur | foucist: lazy/non-strict computation > all! | 21:17 |
| augur | haskell will dominate! | 21:17 |
| augur | fenn: oh thats true, yes. i dont deny that parallelism is a huge thing in computation right now. | 21:18 |
| -!- klafka [~textual@cpe-69-205-70-55.rochester.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.] | 21:18 | |
| augur | but thats a concern that should come /after/ the design of a correct program, not before. get the program to run correctly, then get it to run fast. | 21:19 |
| augur | also, fenn, graphene processors promise to bump clockspeed to the 300-500GHz range, if recent news is accurate | 21:20 |
| fenn | that article (parallelism is not concurrency) is not making sense to me | 21:20 |
| augur | shame. i dont think i could explain it better than he does | 21:20 |
| fenn | "parallelism is an abstraction, not an implementation" huh? | 21:20 |
| fenn | i think he should start off with some definitions after "rebooting the reader" | 21:21 |
| augur | also, fenn, if megahal is a markov model, i can tell you /precisely/ why it sucs | 21:22 |
| fenn | because it's stateless | 21:22 |
| augur | well besides that | 21:22 |
| augur | there are many reasons why megahal sucks | 21:22 |
| fenn | i think it's quite fun actually | 21:22 |
| augur | the first, which statelessness relates to, is that natural language is not regular, probably not even context-free. markov models are strictly regular. | 21:23 |
| fenn | tell me why it sucks more than any other simple AI algorithm | 21:23 |
| augur | so its no surprise it produes garbled crap. | 21:23 |
| fenn | you never answered what the intention was | 21:23 |
| augur | secondly, its not really AI: its just chewing through text and running correlations to spit out new text, and would work similarly on, say, chess moves or musical notation or digestive patterns. it has no recourse to any sort of semantics to structure its behavior in any fashion. | 21:24 |
| augur | i did tell you my intention! | 21:24 |
| augur | something agent-ish! | 21:25 |
| fenn | "its just chewing through text and running correlations to spit out new text" is not intelligence? | 21:25 |
| augur | well, you know, in as much as anything is intelligent :) | 21:25 |
| fenn | i believe most humans do the same sort of thing, but have better filtering | 21:26 |
| augur | i wouldnt consider just running statistical analyses of symbol transitions by itself to be enough for something to be considered AI | 21:26 |
| augur | humans definitely Do do similar sorts of things | 21:26 |
| augur | but its almost certainly not _all_ we do | 21:26 |
| fenn | n-gram transitions perhaps | 21:26 |
| fenn | again, this is getting lost in a text-based view of reality, which it certainly is not | 21:27 |
| augur | i mean, at some level maybe its transitions of some sort. some crazy higher-order transition stuff who knows | 21:27 |
| augur | thats also another problem -- megahal is just a text widget. | 21:27 |
| fenn | and you expect your AI to make sense of non-textual data? | 21:28 |
| fenn | suddenly it's not a simple problem | 21:28 |
| augur | i dont expect it to make sense of anything significant. like i said, its intended to be an agent, so its non-textual data is just its affordances, its in-computer environment, etc. | 21:29 |
| kanzure | wheee isn't this fun | 21:31 |
| kanzure | also, i told you so | 21:31 |
| fenn | kanzure: wah. | 21:31 |
| kanzure | it's okay you have a chance to redeem yourself in robot hell | 21:32 |
| fenn | augur: you should do something with music, real-time sound analysis and repetition. lots of room for creativity | 21:32 |
| kanzure | what's wrong with whole brain emulation? | 21:32 |
| fenn | it's too slow | 21:32 |
| kanzure | in the scheme of things that's not a big problem | 21:33 |
| augur | kanzure: nothing. its just not my goal right now. :) | 21:33 |
| kanzure | i thought your goal was 'ai' | 21:33 |
| kanzure | (and i thought my goal was goalism or something) | 21:33 |
| kanzure | goal goal goal goal | 21:33 |
| fenn | kanzure: would you like to play kurzweil for a day? when will we have sufficient computing power to simulate a human brain in real time for $1000? | 21:33 |
| augur | also, i want to understand thought, not merely recreate it somehow | 21:33 |
| augur | black boxes do not satisfy me | 21:33 |
| kanzure | fenn: umm, uhh, doesn't theuncertainfuture.com do that | 21:33 |
| fenn | yeah but your specific prediction | 21:34 |
| kanzure | in fact, i'm pretty sure there's a few scenarios on there specifically for wbe | 21:34 |
| augur | fenn: i have some minor interest in music stuff | 21:34 |
| kanzure | well every time i put numbers into their it says a singularity is happening in 2 or 3 years | 21:34 |
| augur | but not anything related to analysis, etc. | 21:34 |
| augur | im more interested in formal theories | 21:34 |
| fenn | formal theories are all bullshit | 21:34 |
| kanzure | my mom was a formal theory | 21:34 |
| kanzure | i can confirm this | 21:34 |
| kanzure | former formal theory | 21:34 |
| fenn | <- scientist, discordian | 21:35 |
| fenn | augur: there's not enough to work with if you just feed your baby curated text | 21:35 |
| kanzure | doesn't ENKI do that | 21:35 |
| fenn | uh, too many enki's | 21:36 |
| kanzure | ENKI-][: | 21:36 |
| kanzure | that one. | 21:36 |
| fenn | resolve name conflict please! | 21:36 |
| kanzure | megahal namcub accela guy | 21:36 |
| kanzure | john ohno | 21:36 |
| fenn | until a bot shows up here and has a nice conversation here with me, i'll continue persisting in my beliefs about what will and will not work | 21:37 |
| augur | fenn: uh, my intention _isnt_ to feed it curated text of any real sort. not for training. | 21:37 |
| fenn | what then? | 21:37 |
| augur | also, formal theories arent all bullshit. they work plenty well. | 21:38 |
| fenn | the "if p then q" type don't work | 21:38 |
| fenn | the "this looks like a p, maybe q" stand a chance | 21:38 |
| augur | thats (classical) logic. | 21:38 |
| augur | the majority of formal theories are /not/ classical logic. | 21:39 |
| fenn | do enlighten | 21:39 |
| kanzure | pron.com user db? wtf http://lulzsecurity.com/releases/pronz.txt | 21:39 |
| augur | well, when it comes to AI i cant say, actually | 21:39 |
| kanzure | sorry but this still doesn't sound productive at all | 21:40 |
| augur | but for logic itself, there are plenty of non-classical logics. linear logic and its descendants are pretty interesting. one is a logic of "causality" that has some interesting capacities. | 21:40 |
| augur | frame-based reasoning works really well at text comprehension, at least from what ive seen. | 21:40 |
| -!- eridu [~eridu@gateway/tor-sasl/eridu] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 21:41 | |
| augur | and that was back in the 70s | 21:41 |
| augur | hey eridu. | 21:41 |
| eridu | hello augur | 21:41 |
| -!- mayko [~mayko@71-22-217-151.gar.clearwire-wmx.net] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 21:42 | |
| augur | hows life, dude | 21:42 |
| eridu | busy as fuck | 21:42 |
| fenn | the wp article on frame reasoning mentions "spreading activation" which sounds a lot like neural networks to me | 21:43 |
| fenn | are you saying neural networks are a formal theory? | 21:43 |
| augur | eridu: anything good? | 21:44 |
| eridu | not really | 21:44 |
| eridu | lot of half-finished projects and lost campaigns | 21:44 |
| eridu | I guess I got published in between now and when we last talked | 21:45 |
| augur | fenn: spreading activation in the frame context just means that there is a semantic network that structures the frames, whereby the frame problem is solved by biased search to the activated frames | 21:45 |
| augur | fenn: eg frame 1 "activates" frame 2, which means when the program looks for new frames to apply to the situation, itll check frame 2 first | 21:46 |
| augur | thats a toy explanation of spreading activation but you get the point | 21:46 |
| augur | the frames are just formal objects akin to predicates with more information | 21:46 |
| augur | eridu: oh? published for? | 21:46 |
| augur | eridu: also, lost campaigns? :\ | 21:47 |
| augur | did you run for emperor? | 21:47 |
| fenn | what creates the bias for frame 2 instead of some other frame? | 21:47 |
| kanzure | frame.. context.. words, bitches | 21:47 |
| fenn | also my google fu is failing at "logic of causality" | 21:47 |
| eridu | augur: yeah, the administration fucked us over on daycon | 21:48 |
| eridu | also sds is dead | 21:48 |
| fenn | http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causality#Logic looks like "if p then q" logic to me | 21:48 |
| augur | fenn: the background semantic network that the designers built in. things like restaurant frames are associated with eating frames, paying frames, etc. but not with, say, sky diving frames | 21:49 |
| augur | fenn: you'd think so, but thats because natural language is tricking you ;) | 21:49 |
| augur | fenn: classical implication (if-then) is strictly a correlational property, not a causational one. | 21:49 |
| -!- eridu [~eridu@gateway/tor-sasl/eridu] has quit [Quit: Leaving] | 21:49 | |
| augur | actually natural language's conditional is also correlational, but there's a strong pragmatic implicature in certain contexts | 21:50 |
| augur | there are many ways to override this tho. | 21:50 |
| augur | i can find you the causal logic thing. they address AI-related issues in it, actually. | 21:50 |
| augur | classical ones tho, nothing magical. | 21:50 |
| augur | Prolegomena of a Logic of Causality and Dynamism - Bellot et al. | 21:51 |
| kanzure | i can never really size up people when talking about ai | 21:51 |
| kanzure | i have no idea if you're a machine learning newbie or not | 21:51 |
| kanzure | but i do remember you wrote some linguistics papers? | 21:51 |
| augur | im a linguist, yes | 21:51 |
| augur | and im familiar with many ideas form ML, i just dont know jack about the details | 21:51 |
| augur | fenn: http://wellnowwhat.net/transfers/Prolegomena%20of%20a%20Logic%20of%20Causality%20and%20Dynamism%20-%20Bellot%20et%20al..pdf | 21:52 |
| fenn | ML is just a fancy word for "statistics with computers" | 21:53 |
| kanzure | search algorithms are statistics now? | 21:54 |
| fenn | most people think of statistics as what they learned in high school, so it really does need to be sexed up | 21:54 |
| fenn | yeap pretty much | 21:54 |
| kanzure | the mlai world just keeps redefining shit in a million ways | 21:55 |
| kanzure | this is really useless guys.. | 21:55 |
| augur | kanzure: ML is more than just search algos | 21:55 |
| augur | well, depends on what you mean by search i guess | 21:55 |
| kanzure | yes i know | 21:55 |
| augur | ultimately, fenn, ofcourse statistical inferences need to be used | 21:56 |
| augur | but you cant do statistics without a good underlying model that is non-statistical | 21:57 |
| fenn | yes we need to implement it after all | 21:57 |
| fenn | have you ever read "reciprocality"? | 21:58 |
| augur | nope | 21:58 |
| -!- mayko [~mayko@71-22-217-151.gar.clearwire-wmx.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] | 21:58 | |
| augur | statistics is an addition to an underlying formal theory tho, i must stress this | 21:58 |
| fenn | http://www.buildfreedom.com/content/reciprocality/ | 21:58 |
| fenn | formal theories are what you do with the last step, once you know it's probably a cat and not a chair | 21:59 |
| augur | not at all true | 21:59 |
| fenn | the problem seems to be determining it's a cat | 21:59 |
| augur | you simply cant do any statistics without an underlying non-statistical theory | 21:59 |
| augur | simply because without that, theres nothing to run statistics over! | 21:59 |
| fenn | yeah sure, like "this is a matrix with pixel values from a camera" | 21:59 |
| fenn | that's not a theory, that's a statement of fact | 22:00 |
| augur | yeah but what statistics will you calculate off of that | 22:00 |
| fenn | i'd run lots of things in parallel | 22:00 |
| augur | yeah but what statistics | 22:00 |
| fenn | correlation between feature clusters | 22:00 |
| augur | feature clusters are not in the pixel values | 22:01 |
| fenn | right | 22:01 |
| augur | congratulations, youve just invented a theory | 22:01 |
| augur | and a formal one at that | 22:01 |
| fenn | i am underwhelmed | 22:01 |
| augur | because the feature clusters are below the stats! | 22:01 |
| augur | you should be underwhelmed! | 22:01 |
| augur | vision theory is a different issue tho | 22:02 |
| augur | ofcourse AI should have a statistical vision theory underlying it | 22:02 |
| fenn | (i mean feature as in the SIFT points, not in the statistics sense) | 22:02 |
| augur | but vision theory itself, as a whole, has the stats on the top. | 22:02 |
| augur | if you stratify to separate concerns, you get the formal theory at the bottom of each module, with stats on top of that | 22:03 |
| augur | stats over a theory of the visual system, stats over a theory of sentence structure, stats over a theory of world knowledge, stats over a theory of human behavior, etc. | 22:03 |
| fenn | i don't like hard coding theories | 22:04 |
| augur | you have to have _something_ to calculate stats over. even if its just your theory of visual features. | 22:04 |
| fenn | currently with limited computer power can only perform brittle crystalline calculations on pixel values, but it doesn't *have* to be that way | 22:05 |
| augur | or you theory of theories of visual features, if you want to run higher-order statistics | 22:05 |
| augur | i agree completely. | 22:05 |
| augur | but you still have to have a theory of what matters and what doesnt, what is looked for and what isnt | 22:05 |
| fenn | if you say so | 22:05 |
| augur | the intuitive stuff like edges, polygons, shading, etc. are all sensible, ofcourse | 22:06 |
| augur | but those arent derived from the stats | 22:06 |
| augur | they precede it | 22:06 |
| fenn | "of course" is what killed AI research | 22:06 |
| augur | ;) | 22:06 |
| epitron | nature doesn't have many polygons :( | 22:06 |
| fenn | "of course space is euclidean" | 22:06 |
| augur | epitron: sure it does, they're just really tiny ;) | 22:07 |
| epitron | and in terms of how the brain works, polygons are the highest level | 22:07 |
| augur | fenn: well, afaact it IS euclidean! | 22:07 |
| epitron | they're very abstract and generalized | 22:07 |
| epitron | like language | 22:07 |
| epitron | your modules are upside-down | 22:07 |
| epitron | you're doing top-down plus bottom up statistics | 22:07 |
| augur | epitron: im not saying polys really are at the bottom | 22:07 |
| augur | i was using that as an example | 22:08 |
| epitron | sure | 22:08 |
| epitron | but it's still upside-down :) | 22:08 |
| augur | perhaps! | 22:08 |
| augur | my point is that you cant run statistics over nothing | 22:08 |
| fenn | the egyptians drew their maps with the source of the nile at the top | 22:09 |
| augur | you always have to make decisions about what the underlying theory is. | 22:09 |
| augur | and that underlying theory is not itself a statistical one | 22:09 |
| epitron | you mean, assumptions to limit your search space? | 22:09 |
| epitron | those are good | 22:09 |
| fenn | he just means how you determine the set of data to do statistics upon | 22:09 |
| epitron | well, if they're good assumptions | 22:09 |
| epitron | true | 22:09 |
| epitron | good data is lso good :) | 22:10 |
| fenn | it's not even a search space at that point | 22:10 |
| augur | fenn: often enough the data you run stats on is structured in some way or other | 22:10 |
| fenn | let's just say it's binary data | 22:10 |
| fenn | what regularities do you see? | 22:10 |
| epitron | i wonder how many people in the world are talking about re-engineering the brain right now | 22:10 |
| epitron | probably a lot | 22:10 |
| augur | fenn: that depends on what sort of grammar you're using! | 22:10 |
| epitron | at least a few hundred | 22:10 |
| fenn | can you infer ascii text based on the absence of a 1 in the 8th bit? | 22:10 |
| augur | if you're using a 1-gram model, you get jack shit | 22:10 |
| augur | if you're using a 10-gram model you get more | 22:11 |
| augur | if you allow context free behavior, you get even more | 22:11 |
| * epitron rolls a 1-gram model | 22:11 | |
| fenn | a few hundred is not a lot compared to most fields | 22:12 |
| augur | fenn: you have to make a choice even in binary processing about what sort of structure the data is assumed to have | 22:12 |
| augur | if you choose a CF model, you will get better results than if you have a regular model. that is a fact. | 22:13 |
| augur | at least if the data is CF in structure | 22:13 |
| fenn | CF? | 22:13 |
| augur | context-free | 22:13 |
| fenn | if you start with the answer, you will get a better answer | 22:14 |
| augur | a classical example of a CF language, in pure binary, would be: all bit strings with a bunch of 0's at the beginning, and the same number of 1's folloiwng that | 22:14 |
| augur | a markov model simply can never learn this. it might _MIGHT_ be able to get arbitrarily close. but that iwll also depend on how many states you allow it to have, etc. etc. | 22:15 |
| augur | fenn: im not starting with the answer tho thats the point | 22:15 |
| kanzure | 'america invents act' http://www.hoover.org/publications/defining-ideas/article/82096 | 22:15 |
| augur | youre always making assumptions about the nature of the system. assumptions which arent based on statistics. | 22:15 |
| augur | sure you can generalize your system so that it can dynamically shift from one kind of assumption to the next, or whatever, but you're not escaping the underlying non-statistical nature of the system | 22:16 |
| fenn | you can start with a large number of statistical models and choose the one that predicts the data best | 22:16 |
| augur | all you're doing is making the non-statistical component adaptive | 22:17 |
| augur | fenn: sure, but those statistical models are still statistics over SOMETHING | 22:17 |
| augur | and that something is not statistical in nature | 22:17 |
| fenn | noisy sensor data | 22:17 |
| augur | not just | 22:17 |
| fenn | don't get all "digital sampling is a formal theory" on me | 22:17 |
| augur | your stats are stats of SOMETHING | 22:18 |
| augur | state transitions, production rules, etc. | 22:18 |
| augur | they're stats running over something non-statistical | 22:18 |
| fenn | is a fourier transform a formal theory? | 22:18 |
| augur | that depends on your opinion of math. it is certainly a purely mathematical concept. | 22:19 |
| augur | but its also tangential to the point | 22:19 |
| augur | you run a fourier transform, but /then what/? | 22:19 |
| augur | now you just have data of a different shape. | 22:19 |
| augur | big deal. | 22:19 |
| augur | what are you attributing probabilities to, fenn | 22:20 |
| augur | probabilites are probabilities of _something_ | 22:20 |
| fenn | it is an assumption to make in order to get better predictability out of your statistics | 22:20 |
| augur | sure, fourier transforms are nicer to deal with. i know that | 22:20 |
| augur | but that doesnt change anything | 22:20 |
| augur | what are you calculating the probabilities of. thats the point. | 22:20 |
| augur | what has the probabilities. | 22:20 |
| fenn | arbitrary things | 22:21 |
| fenn | i dont know the word | 22:21 |
| fenn | a variable | 22:21 |
| augur | i feel like you're not very familiar with machine learning... | 22:21 |
| fenn | monica calls them 'hypotheses' | 22:21 |
| augur | well i dont know what monica is | 22:22 |
| fenn | a person who does ai research | 22:22 |
| augur | yyyeah... | 22:22 |
| fenn | different algorithms have different sorts of outputs, it's not always straightforward to integrate many different algorithms | 22:23 |
| kanzure | are you two going to blather about bayesian bullshit yet | 22:23 |
| kanzure | *poke* | 22:23 |
| augur | look, its clear you're not familiar enough with ML techniques to even defend your own position adequately | 22:23 |
| * kanzure pops some popcorn | 22:23 | |
| QuantumG | sooo.. linguistics eh.. are dictionaries descriptive or prescriptive? | 22:23 |
| augur | kanzure: well, bayesian inference is ofcourse superior, so. | 22:23 |
| augur | QuantumG: depends on the dictionary. | 22:24 |
| QuantumG | can a prescriptive dictionary be the result of linguistics? | 22:24 |
| augur | no, but i would argue that descriptive ones cant either. | 22:24 |
| fenn | if it's a conlang | 22:24 |
| QuantumG | do tell | 22:25 |
| augur | linguistics is the scientific study of language | 22:25 |
| augur | that immediately rules out prescriptivism in any form | 22:25 |
| QuantumG | agreed | 22:25 |
| augur | science describes, models, etc. it does not proscribe | 22:25 |
| QuantumG | go on | 22:26 |
| augur | further, dictionaries are documentations of usage. documentation is important, but its not study. there is no explanation to be done with dictionaries. | 22:26 |
| QuantumG | ahh.. I see your argument. Well, intermediate products are also products. | 22:27 |
| augur | they are, but they're not necessarily the same sort of thing as the end product. | 22:27 |
| augur | You need gasoline for cars, but oil refinement is not automotive engineering. | 22:28 |
| augur | i have great respect for lexicographers, but its not linguistics. | 22:28 |
| augur | there is no science being done there. | 22:28 |
| fenn | i dont see how you can do science by making formal models of a system that routinely breaks the rules | 22:29 |
| augur | you'd be surprised how little language actually violates the rules. | 22:30 |
| augur | you just have to know what the rules actually are. | 22:30 |
| QuantumG | discovering that there are any rules at all is the greatest achievement of linguistics | 22:30 |
| fenn | meh | 22:30 |
| augur | meh! | 22:31 |
| fenn | grammar goes back thousands of years | 22:31 |
| augur | yes it does, but not as a science | 22:31 |
| augur | grammar as a prescriptive act certainly does tho. | 22:31 |
| QuantumG | physics goes back thousands of years.. science is the method of refinement | 22:31 |
| fenn | which came first, the language or the prescriptivist grammar? | 22:31 |
| augur | the language, surely. | 22:32 |
| augur | you cant be snobby about french if there aint no french! | 22:32 |
| fenn | so where did the grammar come from? | 22:32 |
| augur | grammar is in peoples heads. | 22:32 |
| QuantumG | physical reality of course. | 22:32 |
| augur | writing down a grammar for a language is just an attempt to capture the knowledge people have in their heads | 22:33 |
| QuantumG | linguistics is as much about the study of physical reality as physics. | 22:33 |
| fenn | some people would say genetics or evolution, but i'm not sure | 22:33 |
| augur | fenn: thats where the FACULTY of language comes from | 22:33 |
| fenn | oh the FACULTY | 22:33 |
| augur | but the grammars themselves are not genetic/evolved | 22:33 |
| fenn | that makes it so clear! | 22:33 |
| augur | fenn: think of it like this | 22:33 |
| augur | being able to move around on two legs coordinatedly is genetic | 22:34 |
| augur | waltzes are not. | 22:34 |
| fenn | feral children raised by wolves do not walk on two legs | 22:34 |
| augur | this is (perhaps?) true | 22:34 |
| augur | the brain is not static | 22:34 |
| fenn | also there are dogs with only two hind legs that balance | 22:34 |
| augur | unused portions of the brain are reallocated. | 22:34 |
| augur | we know this. | 22:35 |
| fenn | if all humans walked on four legs, so would their children | 22:35 |
| augur | probably! | 22:35 |
| fenn | what makes waltzes less genetic than walking? | 22:35 |
| augur | but take one of their children and raise the kid among bipeds, and the child would not have trouble learning it competently | 22:35 |
| augur | and without any training, too | 22:36 |
| augur | but a dog will not. | 22:36 |
| fenn | let us imagine a machine that can perform any possible sequence of foot maneuvers | 22:36 |
| augur | admittedly they probably have the cognitive capacity, its mostly in their physical structure thats an issue | 22:36 |
| augur | they also probably lack the finer balance stuff that bipeds have | 22:36 |
| fenn | i bet you a bajillion dollars most humans will not be able to learn a significant portion of its dances | 22:36 |
| augur | certainly | 22:36 |
| augur | its an analogy, fenn | 22:37 |
| QuantumG | not that it's the topic, but I don't think we'd consider them "dances" .. just as we don't consider many sequences of sounds to be language. | 22:37 |
| augur | point is, languages are not genetically encoded. the ability to use them is. | 22:37 |
| fenn | i disagree | 22:37 |
| augur | well you're wrong. | 22:37 |
| fenn | it has been a displeasure talking with you | 22:38 |
| augur | the feeling is mutual, o lay friend. | 22:38 |
| * kanzure eats more popcorn | 22:38 | |
| kanzure | when will you mortals learn that i am the superior option | 22:38 |
| fenn | what's the inverse of "told you so"? | 22:39 |
| kanzure | "you sure told me"? | 22:39 |
| augur | fenn: "you're right" | 22:39 |
| augur | or "you were right" | 22:39 |
| fenn | btw, space is not euclidean, in case that was in doubt. | 22:53 |
| augur | all measurements show it to be flat, fenn. | 22:54 |
| augur | there's no detectable curvature | 22:54 |
| augur | you know, modulo gravity | 22:54 |
| QuantumG | all evidence indications that space is euclidean | 22:55 |
| augur | the large-scale geometry of space is flat. locally, gravity changes things ofcourse. | 22:55 |
| * augur steals kanzure's popcorn | 23:00 | |
| -!- mode/##hplusroadmap [+o kanzure] by ChanServ | 23:02 | |
| -!- augur was kicked from ##hplusroadmap by kanzure [augur] | 23:02 | |
| @kanzure | don't fucking steal my motherfucking popcorn | 23:02 |
| QuantumG | heh | 23:02 |
| -!- mode/##hplusroadmap [-o kanzure] by ChanServ | 23:02 | |
| -!- augur [~augur@208.58.6.161] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 23:03 | |
| augur | :| | 23:03 |
| * augur knocks kanzure's popcorn out of his hands | 23:03 | |
| augur | >| | 23:03 |
| fenn | really, there arent any articles written about "culture invariance of grammar"? | 23:08 |
| augur | sorry? | 23:09 |
| augur | what are you looking for, i can direct you | 23:10 |
| fenn | what is the verbal equivalent of phosphenes called? | 23:10 |
| augur | what | 23:10 |
| fenn | characteristics of grammar that are preserved across all cultures | 23:10 |
| QuantumG | culture invariance of grammar = universal grammar | 23:10 |
| QuantumG | there's an absurd number of articles about it. | 23:10 |
| augur | i dont think that phosphenes are what you mean | 23:10 |
| augur | but yes, grammatical universals are the property in question | 23:11 |
| augur | universal grammar is the theory of grammatical universals | 23:11 |
| augur | maybe you're thinking of form constants, fenn? | 23:12 |
| QuantumG | study of how children "flip the bits" on the universal grammar to learn the particular native dialect is about a year's worth of reading. | 23:12 |
| augur | honestly, im skeptical of that sort of parametricity, QuantumG. | 23:12 |
| augur | ive never bought it, to be honest. | 23:12 |
| fenn | no, not form constants | 23:12 |
| fenn | phosphenes are patterns and colors you see when you push on your eyeballs | 23:13 |
| fenn | all humans see the same patterns | 23:13 |
| augur | perhaps | 23:13 |
| augur | if so, only because of the structure of the eye | 23:14 |
| augur | form constants are a better analogy to universals. | 23:14 |
| -!- jenzebubble [jen@173-29-174-114.client.mchsi.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] | 23:14 | |
| QuantumG | which is the same argument for universal grammar. That we all have the same machinery for "looking" at language. | 23:14 |
| augur | actually if there were an eye-ball analogy it would relate to ears :p | 23:15 |
| QuantumG | well, I was more thinking about edge detection and other visual cortex processing that we all do. | 23:16 |
| fenn | the drawings online of form constants dont look anything like phosphene shapes to me | 23:16 |
| QuantumG | but yes | 23:16 |
| augur | fenn: no, they dont | 23:16 |
| augur | they're not supposed to | 23:16 |
| augur | form constants are shapes that are common to many sorts of atypical visual stimulation | 23:16 |
| fenn | often phosphenes look like characters written in some language i can't read, or grid or moire patterns | 23:17 |
| augur | eg hallucinogens | 23:17 |
| augur | you have interesting phosphenes | 23:18 |
| augur | ive never had that | 23:18 |
| fenn | well, so much for that theory :P | 23:19 |
| augur | what | 23:22 |
| fenn | that all humans see the same patterns | 23:22 |
| fenn | probably just me misremembering what i read | 23:23 |
| augur | you read about form constants | 23:23 |
| mrtrousers | Anyone interested in coming to Barcelona and get a Hackerspace started? | 23:23 |
| mrtrousers | There will be biohacking! | 23:23 |
| augur | mrtrousers: i wish i could! | 23:23 |
| mrtrousers | ;) | 23:29 |
| -!- klord [~klord@99-67-239-104.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] | 23:49 | |
| -!- klord [~klord@99-67-239-104.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net] has joined ##hplusroadmap | 23:57 | |
| --- Log closed Tue Jun 14 00:00:07 2011 | ||
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.15.0.dev0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!
