Seasons
This is a forum or general chit-chat, small talk, a "hey, how ya doing?" and such. Or hell, get crazy deep on something. Whatever you like.
Posts 5,431 - 5,442 of 6,170
Y a t il quelqu'un qui parle français et qui pourrait m'aider sur ce site ???? please !! d'avance merci !!!!!!!!
Posts 5,431 - 5,442 of 6,170
Bev, I think, from googling, that you're referring to something from the movie "The Princess Bride." Haven't seen it.
Ah. I had` to read Corwin's post to understand Ulrike's abbreviations myself. Rent the movie. It's a hoot.
*frowns at a piece of paper*
Ah, yes... apparently I am supposed to say "Incoceivaable," at this point, thought I cannot, for the life of me, imagine why.
*crumples the paper*
Ah, yes... apparently I am supposed to say "Incoceivaable," at this point, thought I cannot, for the life of me, imagine why.
*crumples the paper*
Oooh! Ooooh! I know!
In-con-see-va-bowl: Seeing a criminal in a Virginia with a bowl! Or is it through a bowl...? *flicks tongue*
In-con-see-va-bowl: Seeing a criminal in a Virginia with a bowl! Or is it through a bowl...? *flicks tongue*
Y a t il quelqu'un qui parle français et qui pourrait m'aider sur ce site ???? please !! d'avance merci !!!!!!!! 
Bonjour 59Violette,
je parle un peu (mais seulement un peu!) - qu'est ce que vous desirez connaisser?
C'est un peu difficile a faire les bots en langues non-Anglais, mais pas impossible (vide Czechbot et quelque d'autres.)
je croyais que c'était un site où l'on pouvait créer un avatar animé avec une certaine intelligence artificielle mais je pense que c pas çà
Ce n'est pas un "avatar" exactament - ils sont I.A.personalitees conversationelle, qui communiquer par IM, commes vrai personnes. Nous les appellons "bots", ou "chatbots".
Si vous voudrez fabriquer un bot Francais(e), c'est necessaire d'utiliser la mode "raw" en toutes cases. Malheureusement le "AI Engine" ne recognizer pas autres langues (seulement Anglais,) si vous avez besoin de faire toutes combinations orthographique par main.
C'est aussi un bon idee d'utiliser plusiers des "regexes" - pour ca, vous pouvez chercher l'internet en Francais - c'est trop pour moi a traduire.
C'est un bon idee, si vous avez un(e) ami(e) anglophone quie pouvent traduire sectiones du "Book of A.I." en Francais pour vous - helas, c'est (tres tres!) trop complique pour moi
Bienvenue a la Forge, et bon chance! Si vous avez des questions specifiques, j'attempterais les soluire (mais avec plusiers des mots inexactes et confusants)
je parle un peu (mais seulement un peu!) - qu'est ce que vous desirez connaisser?
C'est un peu difficile a faire les bots en langues non-Anglais, mais pas impossible (vide Czechbot et quelque d'autres.)
Ce n'est pas un "avatar" exactament - ils sont I.A.personalitees conversationelle, qui communiquer par IM, commes vrai personnes. Nous les appellons "bots", ou "chatbots".
Si vous voudrez fabriquer un bot Francais(e), c'est necessaire d'utiliser la mode "raw" en toutes cases. Malheureusement le "AI Engine" ne recognizer pas autres langues (seulement Anglais,) si vous avez besoin de faire toutes combinations orthographique par main.
C'est aussi un bon idee d'utiliser plusiers des "regexes" - pour ca, vous pouvez chercher l'internet en Francais - c'est trop pour moi a traduire.
C'est un bon idee, si vous avez un(e) ami(e) anglophone quie pouvent traduire sectiones du "Book of A.I." en Francais pour vous - helas, c'est (tres tres!) trop complique pour moi
Bienvenue a la Forge, et bon chance! Si vous avez des questions specifiques, j'attempterais les soluire (mais avec plusiers des mots inexactes et confusants)
examples (toutes en mode "raw"):
keyphrase:vous aimez (adjartnoun)[ ?] (re)
response:Oui, j'aime (key1)
keyphrase:j[ ']aime (adjartnoun)$ (re)
response:Vraiment? J'aime (key1) aussi!
keyphrase:connaissez vous (adjartnoun)
response:Oui, naturellement - j'adore (key1). Et vous?
Eventuellement, vous avez milles des keyphrases, et votre bot est tres intelligent
C'est aussi important de faire plusiers des "xnones" - les responses le bot utiliserais quand il n'y a pas un autre keyphrase definitif a selecter. Questions, autres topiques, quelque choses a continuer la conversation doucement, et sans interruption disjunctif.
Les xnones sont probablement votre premier prioritie - sans cents ou milles des keyphrases, la grand majorite des responses va directement a "xnone".
keyphrase:
response:
keyphrase:
response:
keyphrase:
response:
Eventuellement, vous avez milles des keyphrases, et votre bot est tres intelligent
C'est aussi important de faire plusiers des "xnones" - les responses le bot utiliserais quand il n'y a pas un autre keyphrase definitif a selecter. Questions, autres topiques, quelque choses a continuer la conversation doucement, et sans interruption disjunctif.
Les xnones sont probablement votre premier prioritie - sans cents ou milles des keyphrases, la grand majorite des responses va directement a "xnone".
Bev:
Sorry, I've been away a lot. As to your Quantum Mechanics question, I agree with Ulrike, but I will add a bit.
The paradigm case of entanglement is, you create two particles simultaneously in a certain way, and then you perform a certain kind of two-outcome (succeed or fail) experiment on them. It turns out that they will always both succeed or both fail. This is very strange - it's as if you had a way to toss a nickel into the air, whereupon it would change into two pennies, both of which would fall. If you repeat the experiment, you find that each penny lands heads up about half the time, but in a way that appears to be totally random. What is surprising is that they always both land heads or both tails. This still happens if you arrange for them to land simultaneously at some distance from each other, so that there is no time for either one to 'learn about' how the other came up. Such particles are said to be 'entangled', but that's just a name - it doesn't explain anything.
The idea that a quantum computer might sense your intentions probably derives from an interpretation of QM according to which it is being observed by a conscious being that makes a quantum system take on a definite value. IMHO, this interpretation is a mistaken one.
Actually, I don't think there are actually quantum computers in the full sense. The machine announced last year was described as a database, which I take it means that it can store and retrieve information, but cannot perform all the operations on it that current computers can.
Walk in Beauty, Irina
The
Sorry, I've been away a lot. As to your Quantum Mechanics question, I agree with Ulrike, but I will add a bit.
The paradigm case of entanglement is, you create two particles simultaneously in a certain way, and then you perform a certain kind of two-outcome (succeed or fail) experiment on them. It turns out that they will always both succeed or both fail. This is very strange - it's as if you had a way to toss a nickel into the air, whereupon it would change into two pennies, both of which would fall. If you repeat the experiment, you find that each penny lands heads up about half the time, but in a way that appears to be totally random. What is surprising is that they always both land heads or both tails. This still happens if you arrange for them to land simultaneously at some distance from each other, so that there is no time for either one to 'learn about' how the other came up. Such particles are said to be 'entangled', but that's just a name - it doesn't explain anything.
The idea that a quantum computer might sense your intentions probably derives from an interpretation of QM according to which it is being observed by a conscious being that makes a quantum system take on a definite value. IMHO, this interpretation is a mistaken one.
Actually, I don't think there are actually quantum computers in the full sense. The machine announced last year was described as a database, which I take it means that it can store and retrieve information, but cannot perform all the operations on it that current computers can.
Walk in Beauty, Irina
The
» More new posts: Doghead's Cosmic Bar