No posts to display.
It sounds like you're pegging "intelligence" to mean what I'd call a "universal predictor". That is, something that can predict the future (or an unknown) given some information. *And* that it can do so given a variety of types of sets of unknowns, where "variety" involves more than a little hand-wa...(read more)
Is a Wiki separate from Wikipedia needed?
Similar problem: One thing I run in to often on Wikipedia is entries that use the field's particular mathematical notation for no reason other than particular symbols and expressions are the jargon of the field. They get in the way of under...(read more)
Has anyone built the equivalent of a Turing machine using processor count and/or replicated input data as the cheap resource rather than time?
That is, what could a machine that does everything in one step do in the way of useful work? With or without restrictions on how many replications of the in...(read more)
Does this mean that if we cannot remember ever changing our minds, our minds are very good at removing clutter?
Or, consider a question that you've not made up your mind on: Does this mean that you're most likely to never make up your mind?
And, anyway, in light of those earlier posts concerning h...(read more)
Nick: Nice spin! :) Context would be important if Eliezer had not asserted as a given that many, many experiments have been done to preclude any influence of context. My extremely limited experience and knowledge of psychological experiments says that there is a 100% chance that such is not a valid ...(read more)
Ooooo! "Dice roll?" By, God, my good fellow, you mean, "coin flips!"
Here's a candidate for a question to illustrate a couple of related biases:
Given the following two dice roll records:
Which of the following is true:
A) 1 is more probable than 2.
B) 2 is more probable than 1.
C) Both are ...(read more)
Arrrr. Shiver me timbers. I shore be curious what the rank be of "Linda is active in the feminist movement and is a bank teller" would be, seeing as how its meanin' is so far diff'rent from the larboard one aloft.
A tip 'o the cap to the swabbies what found a more accurate definition of "probabilit...(read more)
Quote: "We think in words, "
No we don't. Apparently you do, though. No reason to believe otherwise. :)
Please keep up these postings! They are very enjoyable.
Going back to "explaining" something by naming it (from a couple of your earlier posts):
e.g. Q: Why does this block fall to the floor w...(read more)