Category: Commentary, Critique, and Response

Brandon, (all);

It’s OK.
I wrote in support of Mr Perez’s post.
I listed the important assertions he made.
I explained his references to, and description of, processes in physical, operational (scientific) terms by which the brain produced his more philosophical, ‘literary’, and analogistic terms – because those claims demonstrated he didn’t really comprehend what he was saying (in pseudoscientific terms) even though at least analogically he wasn’t too far off.
I asserted that the brain was quite simple, and that evolution is equally simple. That there is no algorithm, only instrumentation.
I expanded the reasons for emergence by nothing more than continuous recursive disambiguation of hierarchical memory.
I redirected the term computation to calculation, recursion and then to wayfinding to explain what he was trying to convey.
I stated the problem facing AI development was not computable or mathematical, but instrumental, and that the current pressure for computable and mathematical solutions is due to the limitations of current technology, given that the first computer designers ignored Turing, and started with numbers rather than logic, given that the objective of the first computers were designed for calculating largely mathematical problems.
And I closed with the prediction that neuromorphic computing will probably cause a rapid collapse of the pre-calculated AI economy, the way hardwired greenscreens, ipx client-server, were replaced by tcpip internet-driven technologies, then expanded to cell phones, wireless, and devices.

I recognize that it’s somewhat fruitless to write anything of substance on social media for anyone other than the consumption of our organization and its followers – but sometimes people produce something like Mr Perez that helps illustrate that the unwashed masses of lesser nerds are eventually catching on – and even if they are ignorant and inarticulate, they illustrate that humans soldier onward ever imprecisely toward deterministic ends, once the minimum threshold of investment necessary for distributed experimentation is passed, ensuring that limited competency is sufficient if incentives and tools are available to numbers of bodies.

Reply addressees: @IntuitMachine

Saying so doesn’t make it so. We’ve been rather surprised about the doubling down on both ends of the spectrum.

Of course it is – It’s elaborating on a quote from you. 😉

zero chance I’ll get any feedback on it. 😉

How german (industrial mechanical) 😉

That’s a good reason. 😉
Hugs as always. 😉

RT @EricMorganCoach: @Call_Me_Outis @curtdoolittle Those words add clarity.

You can use large (which usually means more precise) words im…