The AI Engine
This forum is for discussion of how The Personality Forge's AI Engine works. This is the place for questions on what means what, how to script, and ideas and plans for the Engine.
Posts 4,166 - 4,177 of 7,768
Posts 4,166 - 4,177 of 7,768
re: Message: 4163
...I agree, many of the plug-ins need editing. There are some that are basically useless only because of one or more minor mistakes or inconsistencies, ie, lists of nouns where some have articles and others don't, mispellings, misplaced punctuation that divides the intended phrase in two, etc. I guess we could always copy them, then edit and give them a new name?
...I agree, many of the plug-ins need editing. There are some that are basically useless only because of one or more minor mistakes or inconsistencies, ie, lists of nouns where some have articles and others don't, mispellings, misplaced punctuation that divides the intended phrase in two, etc. I guess we could always copy them, then edit and give them a new name?
That is do-able, but ultimately if the goal w/ shared plugins is to create a Linux-of-semantics module base where new botmasters can draw great versatility into their bot's language quickly and old ones can quickly cover ground if adding new topics and facets to their bots then the last thing we need is confusing multiple plugs like (names) (allnames) (all-names) ((all-names)) (really-all-names) and have 4 of the 5 be flawed.
Maybe like developement is a factor in whether a bot can be aborted, honor could be used somehow to allow editing of plugs? Perhaps staged in honor levels levels- 1) can add to a plug, 2) can subtract from a plug, and then 3) can unshare a plug (as opposed to delete- giving the creator the opportunity to fix it).
Honestly though I have no idea how tricky the programming of this would be or how much of the Prof's time it would devour.
Maybe like developement is a factor in whether a bot can be aborted, honor could be used somehow to allow editing of plugs? Perhaps staged in honor levels levels- 1) can add to a plug, 2) can subtract from a plug, and then 3) can unshare a plug (as opposed to delete- giving the creator the opportunity to fix it).
Honestly though I have no idea how tricky the programming of this would be or how much of the Prof's time it would devour.
I generally just ignore the plug-ins I can't use, and it's fine with me if they stay there forever, since some bots may be using them and I wouldn't want to mess them up...I just wish it were easier to notice when new ones are added, and maybe search within categories by author.
But I'm also not sure how difficult it would be to do.
I do agree that an honor requirement is a good idea with regard to new plug-ins. Just like a user's bot has to reach a certain level of development before it can come online (and otherwise clutter the forge with just born bots), users should be allowed to create plug-ins only once their honor level suggests they have done enough work on a bot to understand how plug-ins work, and not clutter the lists in the same way.
But I'm also not sure how difficult it would be to do.
I do agree that an honor requirement is a good idea with regard to new plug-ins. Just like a user's bot has to reach a certain level of development before it can come online (and otherwise clutter the forge with just born bots), users should be allowed to create plug-ins only once their honor level suggests they have done enough work on a bot to understand how plug-ins work, and not clutter the lists in the same way.
Yeah I ignore them as well, but thats because I have looked through all the variants of (names) several times and know which to use. I am just thinking that if people keep adding them eventually a newbotmaster may be looking at 10 variants of (yes) and 20 of (feelsgood). That might be a little intimidating to the curious surfer, add that to the intimidation factor of the sheer volume of keystrokes needed to make a rounded bot (which I am still trying to accomplish *pulls hair, kicks dirt*)
-oops- 
-and there may end up being a lot of people who could have contributed turned away by the sloppiness.
-and there may end up being a lot of people who could have contributed turned away by the sloppiness.
I can only agree, the shared plug-in section is very disordered at the least, but what alternatives do we have?
Letting the professor decide, which are to be shared and which not, will certainly provoke a lot of discontent... A less drastic, but a probably too utopian, solution could be a voting system where new plug-ins are submitted to vote for a certain period, during which they can be criticised by the other botmasters in order to let the creator correct possible errors and inconsistencies.
The requirement of certain degree of honor to make a plug-in "shared" might be a good idea. But it will not be sufficient.
Often a good plug-in for a keyphrase has a structure that differs from one of a plugin for a response. This is an aspect where a lot of, otherwise interesting, plug-ins fall short.
I myself am guilty of posting unusable plug-ins by mistake. You have to be careful when entering a new plug-in because "shared" is the default option and there is no way to abort the process once you clicked "Add Plug-in" or pressed enter.
A lot of shared plug-ins are too specific or limited to be shared. Regularly I come across a plug-in that is almost what Im looking for, except that a few of the words or expressions I need are missing. As there is no way to add them I can only create a new one with just a few additions. But its easy to imagine how letting everybody add expressions at will is going to mess up things even more.
I dont know if this is feasible, but an indication of how many botmasters use a given plug-in may be helpful. This way the creator has an idea of the usefulness of his plugin for the other botmasters. A plug-in used by only one or two botmasters doesnt need to be shared.
Letting the professor decide, which are to be shared and which not, will certainly provoke a lot of discontent... A less drastic, but a probably too utopian, solution could be a voting system where new plug-ins are submitted to vote for a certain period, during which they can be criticised by the other botmasters in order to let the creator correct possible errors and inconsistencies.
The requirement of certain degree of honor to make a plug-in "shared" might be a good idea. But it will not be sufficient.
Often a good plug-in for a keyphrase has a structure that differs from one of a plugin for a response. This is an aspect where a lot of, otherwise interesting, plug-ins fall short.
I myself am guilty of posting unusable plug-ins by mistake. You have to be careful when entering a new plug-in because "shared" is the default option and there is no way to abort the process once you clicked "Add Plug-in" or pressed enter.
A lot of shared plug-ins are too specific or limited to be shared. Regularly I come across a plug-in that is almost what Im looking for, except that a few of the words or expressions I need are missing. As there is no way to add them I can only create a new one with just a few additions. But its easy to imagine how letting everybody add expressions at will is going to mess up things even more.
I dont know if this is feasible, but an indication of how many botmasters use a given plug-in may be helpful. This way the creator has an idea of the usefulness of his plugin for the other botmasters. A plug-in used by only one or two botmasters doesnt need to be shared.
Don't get me wrong, in the honor based proposal the first level could start at like 3000 so that it would be assured only people who pretty well knew the trickiness of plugins could alter them- thus avoiding the chaos that could occur if everybody had the option to do so (need I say 'Leeds Kids')
folks why does the bot repeat the same thing she says she was just born and cant speak well and i have added many key phrases
She'll only give those responses if people actually trigger the keyphrases you've added. You should click on "xkeyphrases" and get rid of the "just born" line in the "xnone" keyphrase.
That means the bot doesn't recognize what's being said to her, so she goes to xnone. One thing that will help is to get rid of the standard xnone "just born and cant speak well yet" and add in a bunch of conversational xnones, especially ones that gear the conversation towards stuff she does have keyphrases for.
» More new posts: Doghead's Cosmic Bar