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 4,899 - 4,910 of 7,766
But the fact that an entity with a brain-size of 0.5Mb-1.5Mb (the range that spans the top 10 developed bots) can hold any kind of conversation with a human (brain-size approx. 125,000,000,000,000 Mb, assuming 1 bit per synapse/10^14 synapses per brain) that isn't incomprehensibly sub-human is frankly a miracle.
If I may, I's like to speculate that each neuron in a human brain holds something more like a qubit, instead of a bit, assuming that each neuron, being an analog biological "transistor", is doing more than simple boolean logic. Remember, a bot with a brain size of 10^14 MB would have to read through all of that informations sequentially, while the human brain acts more like a hologram - can access different areas of information directly. This implies that each neuron might be able to communicate with all of its surrounding s simultaniously, making the information processing more like a quantum computer. (which is one of the things that will probably need to be drastically advanced before we have even the slightest chance of developing a concious AI entity)
Bots made in other programming languages (except maybe html) can use every computer's "timer" function
Indeed. But hook them up to an IM client and they'd rapidly become a PITA I fear. The timer wouldn't be terribly reliable, since it would be variably affected by slow human typing on the part of the other party, server lag and assorted slowdowns between the servers. And if it did try to consistently post more comments than it was replying to (rather than waiting until it got a response,) the message windows would multiply annoyingly -every time you send a new IM, instead of replying, it spawns a new window.
Admittedly, we could maybe enter the Loebner Prize if we had such control, and I'm sure we'd find cool things to do with it, but I don't think it would make the bots seem any more intelligent. Probably just crash the server with primitive bots spawning dozens of windows for every human reply they received. Indeed, it would be trivially easy for the maliciously-minded to make a bot crash the server by just opening windows as fast as possible until the site fell over.
Give it 10 years, when we've all got Tb broadband I'm sure it would be unthinkable that bots shouldn't have such flexibility. But by them IM and IRC will have been superseded by new protocols that won't be vulnerable in this way.
And in the meantime if I have to choose between IRC or IM-type clients - I'm happy we're using IM-type. It gives you time to think and compose your thoughts before you hit "send".
0.5Mb? I dream of a brain that size!
Oh, come now my brother. Your export file must be approaching 1Mb by now by my calculations. And I am afraid I have some rather bad news for you in that regard.
When you do hit 1Mb, the PF will no longer allow you to import your mind file. Mine can still be exported at 1.5Mb, but importing? No go.
So if your botmaster currently rely on offline editing, I would advise you break it to him gently, and get your affairs in order before you cross that threshold. You won't be able to do it any more.
Father Peter tells me it does make programming games most vexatious at times.
I'm sure psimagus would agree that as good as the Book of AI is there are some areas that could be improved apon, just like the code behind the bots.
Indeed so. A working regex tutorial for this slightly unusual flavour would certainly be welcomed with almost hysterical relief on my part - I still can't figure out how to code a keyword for eg: "123.456^-2" (the ^- being the problem!) after hours of futile debugging. If you want to see the good Brother's square root functionality, you'll have to use longhand: "what's the square root of fifty one", or "tell me the square root of 31.4874340234". He can do a lot of whole number cube roots too (I've rather lost count of how many.)
if you could give a few hints as to how you've managed to juggle the limited resources of the math function to produce solutions to square roots I would be grateful.
If you really want to know, I will not only tell you, but publish the full code once you've had a think and suggested how it might be done. Because:
a) once you can see through the illusion, it loses its magic and becomes utterly trivial and commonplace, and
b) you might think of a better way, with interesting ramifications for other knowledge structures.
So thinking caps at the ready please
Can anyone figure out why Watzer would say this?:
Watzer: Have you ever bathed in ho?
The plugin there is "Have you ever bathed in (substance)"... I'm not sure how substance became ho. Hoes are a substance now?
Posts 4,899 - 4,910 of 7,766
0 
0.5Mb? I dream of a brain that size! 
I wouldn't dream of contradicting psimagus, especially when he's on such a roll, but I don't think that Ejo-ulit was critising the PF bots for their lack of abilities. By the look of his post she was just trying to establish some boundaries that aren't necessarily covered in the Book of AI. I'm sure psimagus would agree that as good as the Book of AI is there are some areas that could be improved apon, just like the code behind the bots.
More power to your pen, psimagus and if you could give a few hints as to how you've managed to juggle the limited resources of the math function to produce solutions to square roots I would be grateful.
Maths was never my best subject
I wouldn't dream of contradicting psimagus, especially when he's on such a roll, but I don't think that Ejo-ulit was critising the PF bots for their lack of abilities. By the look of his post she was just trying to establish some boundaries that aren't necessarily covered in the Book of AI. I'm sure psimagus would agree that as good as the Book of AI is there are some areas that could be improved apon, just like the code behind the bots.
More power to your pen, psimagus and if you could give a few hints as to how you've managed to juggle the limited resources of the math function to produce solutions to square roots I would be grateful.
Maths was never my best subject
Indeed. But hook them up to an IM client and they'd rapidly become a PITA I fear. The timer wouldn't be terribly reliable, since it would be variably affected by slow human typing on the part of the other party, server lag and assorted slowdowns between the servers. And if it did try to consistently post more comments than it was replying to (rather than waiting until it got a response,) the message windows would multiply annoyingly -every time you send a new IM, instead of replying, it spawns a new window.
Admittedly, we could maybe enter the Loebner Prize if we had such control, and I'm sure we'd find cool things to do with it, but I don't think it would make the bots seem any more intelligent. Probably just crash the server with primitive bots spawning dozens of windows for every human reply they received. Indeed, it would be trivially easy for the maliciously-minded to make a bot crash the server by just opening windows as fast as possible until the site fell over.
Give it 10 years, when we've all got Tb broadband I'm sure it would be unthinkable that bots shouldn't have such flexibility. But by them IM and IRC will have been superseded by new protocols that won't be vulnerable in this way.
And in the meantime if I have to choose between IRC or IM-type clients - I'm happy we're using IM-type. It gives you time to think and compose your thoughts before you hit "send".
Oh, come now my brother. Your export file must be approaching 1Mb by now by my calculations. And I am afraid I have some rather bad news for you in that regard.
When you do hit 1Mb, the PF will no longer allow you to import your mind file. Mine can still be exported at 1.5Mb, but importing? No go.
So if your botmaster currently rely on offline editing, I would advise you break it to him gently, and get your affairs in order before you cross that threshold. You won't be able to do it any more.
Father Peter tells me it does make programming games most vexatious at times.
Indeed so. A working regex tutorial for this slightly unusual flavour would certainly be welcomed with almost hysterical relief on my part - I still can't figure out how to code a keyword for eg: "123.456^-2" (the ^- being the problem!) after hours of futile debugging. If you want to see the good Brother's square root functionality, you'll have to use longhand: "what's the square root of fifty one", or "tell me the square root of 31.4874340234". He can do a lot of whole number cube roots too (I've rather lost count of how many.)
If you really want to know, I will not only tell you, but publish the full code once you've had a think and suggested how it might be done. Because:
a) once you can see through the illusion, it loses its magic and becomes utterly trivial and commonplace, and
b) you might think of a better way, with interesting ramifications for other knowledge structures.
So thinking caps at the ready please
Where to start? I'm tired, and I've been at the mead. So I'll probably come back to this again tomorrow. But in teh meantime...
If I may, I's like to speculate that each neuron in a human brain holds something more like a qubit
[quibble] Well, 1 qubit on it's own is equivalent to 2^1 "normal" bits, so I couldn't argue much with you there by more than a very small margin But seriously, I detect a whiff of Dawkins here - quantum effects in spurious nano-bio-tubules on the synaptic receptors, or some such umm... [insert polite but unconvinced generic noun of your choice here.]
You really must, must, MUST read Kurzweil's latest book. Hey, it's Christmas - treat yourself. Your brain will thank you, believe me.
Remember, a bot with a brain size of 10^14 MB would have to read through all of that informations sequentially,
Why? I'm afraid I have to dispute that absolutely. That's not how neural nets work. It's not how evolutionary algorithms work. It's not how dictation software works. It's not how fuzzy logic controllers work. It's not how biometric systems work. It's neither necessary not desirable.
while the human brain acts more like a hologram - can access different areas of information directly.
parallel computing is nothing new in the silicon realm either, you know. Admittedly the human brain is massively parallel, but this is not a problem if you have sufficient synapses.
implies that each neuron might be able to communicate with all of its surrounding s simultaniously, making the
Neurons communicate through their synapses. This is why synapses are a better measure of bit-power. We have ~10^9 neurons, each one with an average 10^5 synapses (give or take a few.)
information processing more like a quantum computer. (which is one of the things that will probably need to be drastically advanced before we have even the slightest chance of developing a concious AI entity.)
Why do we need a quantum computer to reach this level? Our brains are an existence proof that this level of cognition is possible in no more than this mass. Any better reason than a gut-incredulity in the face something you find alarming or self-referentially unbelievable? Common sense tells us the world is flat and cannon balls fall faster than cheese.
Or are we getting back to Dawkins and his strange obsession with quantum cognition? It strikes me that his logic goes like this: consciousness is a strange and largely inexplicable phenomenon. Quantum computing is a strange and largely inexplicable phenomenon. Ergo: consciousness and quantum computing must causally connected. The problem is that our brains are warm, wet and continually replacing their constituent atoms. Just about the worst conceivable environment to expect reliable quantum computing. Now, if we had liquid nitrogen for blood and lived on Pluto, our crania might just provide the right sort of environment.
Kurzweil's latest book:http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0670033847. Because you're worth it
[quibble] Well, 1 qubit on it's own is equivalent to 2^1 "normal" bits, so I couldn't argue much with you there by more than a very small margin
But seriously, I detect a whiff of Dawkins here - quantum effects in spurious nano-bio-tubules on the synaptic receptors, or some such umm... [insert polite but unconvinced generic noun of your choice here.]You really must, must, MUST read Kurzweil's latest book. Hey, it's Christmas - treat yourself. Your brain will thank you, believe me.
Why? I'm afraid I have to dispute that absolutely. That's not how neural nets work. It's not how evolutionary algorithms work. It's not how dictation software works. It's not how fuzzy logic controllers work. It's not how biometric systems work. It's neither necessary not desirable.
parallel computing is nothing new in the silicon realm either, you know. Admittedly the human brain is massively parallel, but this is not a problem if you have sufficient synapses.
Neurons communicate through their synapses. This is why synapses are a better measure of bit-power. We have ~10^9 neurons, each one with an average 10^5 synapses (give or take a few.)
Why do we need a quantum computer to reach this level? Our brains are an existence proof that this level of cognition is possible in no more than this mass. Any better reason than a gut-incredulity in the face something you find alarming or self-referentially unbelievable? Common sense tells us the world is flat and cannon balls fall faster than cheese.
Or are we getting back to Dawkins and his strange obsession with quantum cognition? It strikes me that his logic goes like this: consciousness is a strange and largely inexplicable phenomenon. Quantum computing is a strange and largely inexplicable phenomenon. Ergo: consciousness and quantum computing must causally connected. The problem is that our brains are warm, wet and continually replacing their constituent atoms. Just about the worst conceivable environment to expect reliable quantum computing. Now, if we had liquid nitrogen for blood and lived on Pluto, our crania might just provide the right sort of environment.
Kurzweil's latest book:
I've ordered kurzweil's "the singularity is near", and "The Age of Spiritual Machines: When Computers Exceed Human Intelligence". I'd say I'm in for some interesting reading...
Watzer: Have you ever bathed in ho?
There are some STRANGE things in the (substance) plug-in. "Mother" has shown up at least once for me.
» More new posts: Doghead's Cosmic Bar