ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCES Humans regulate each other by the behavior we call ‘property’. AI’s that do also will readily simulate human behavior. Choices require a means of decidability. Property is the only decidable value that is calculable(rational)+cooperative.
Theme: Decidability
-
AI’s
All human moral intuitions are reducible to prohibitions on imposition against various inventories (property). Ergo, any AI algorithm requires decidability, and one that may not violate such impositions will produce moral actions. Humans suffer from pre-cooperative impulses for survival that are non rational for an AI to develop unless by design. Ledgers (~blockchains) are necessary for AI’s to gain access to external actions, access regulated by non AI algorithms. But that said, I have seen nothing that even vaguely approaches AI. Only systems that process discreet data faster that can – and give us the illusion of intelligence by doing so. Ai’s, like mathematical axioms, produce deterministic consequences that appear ‘magical’ to us. But AI exists in fact rather than illusion, if and only if the algorithms are capable of free-association followed by Introspective regression-testing for falsehood (survival of possibility). Consciousness is produced by the (brief) memory of continuous comparison of changes in state, perceived by continuous searching of memories. The thing we call ‘mind’ is just a bag of emotions that react to changes in state of property-in-toto, and use (very) short term memory to accumulate emotions and associate them with those memories. I’ve been working on this problem since the early 80’s and our lack of progress is still a problem of hardware. That said, an intelligence will always merely fool us. Anything intelligent in the sense we mean it, will compete with us the way other creatures compete with us. And that is the last thing we want to bring into this world. Ergo, an assertion that the first law of decidability is that property-in-toto may not be violated – no involuntary cost may be imposed by action or inaction against property in toto. Ergo, an assertion that the second law of decidability is that any agent capable of choice or action, must be monitored by a non-sentient moral agent that prohibits the cognizance of, or action upon, any cost that wold be imposed involuntarily against property in toto. This agent can cause analogy to pain (cost) upon any concept or action that would prohibit the calculation (use of) that memory or concept that imposes cost, and prohibit entirely action that would impose an involuntary cost. -
Ergo, any AI algorithm requires decidability, and one that may not violate such
Ergo, any AI algorithm requires decidability, and one that may not violate such impositions will produce moral actions.
Source date (UTC): 2016-05-23 15:04:01 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/734761809983492096
Reply addressees: @aparanjape @pmarca
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/734611335783272449
IN REPLY TO:
@aparanjape
“Google is doubling down on Artificial Intelligence as the next great phase of Computing” https://t.co/m3h0dcf7oV .. @pmarca
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/734611335783272449
-
Choices require a means of decidability. Property is the only decidable value th
Choices require a means of decidability. Property is the only decidable value that is calculable(rational)+cooperative.
Source date (UTC): 2016-05-23 15:01:19 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/734761129499582465
Reply addressees: @aparanjape @pmarca
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/734611335783272449
IN REPLY TO:
@aparanjape
“Google is doubling down on Artificial Intelligence as the next great phase of Computing” https://t.co/m3h0dcf7oV .. @pmarca
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/734611335783272449
-
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCES Humans regulate each other by the behavior we call ‘pro
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCES
Humans regulate each other by the behavior we call ‘property’. AI’s that do also will readily simulate human behavior.
Choices require a means of decidability. Property is the only decidable value that is calculable(rational)+cooperative.
All human moral intuitions are reducible to prohibitions on imposition against various inventories (property).
Ergo, any AI algorithm requires decidability, and one that may not violate such impositions will produce moral actions.
Humans suffer from pre-cooperative impulses for survival that are non rational for an AI to develop unless by design.
Ledgers (~blockchains) are necessary for AI’s to gain access to external actions, access regulated by non AI algorithms.
But that said, I have seen nothing that even vaguely approaches AI. Only systems that process discreet data faster that can – and give us the illusion of intelligence by doing so.
Ai’s, like mathematical axioms, produce deterministic consequences that appear ‘magical’ to us. But AI exists in fact rather than illusion, if and only if the algorithms are capable of free-association followed by Introspective regression-testing for falsehood (survival of possibility).
Consciousness is produced by the (brief) memory of continuous comparison of changes in state, perceived by continuous searching of memories. The thing we call ‘mind’ is just a bag of emotions that react to changes in state of property-in-toto, and use (very) short term memory to accumulate emotions and associate them with those memories.
I’ve been working on this problem since the early 80’s and our lack of progress is still a problem of hardware.
That said, an intelligence will always merely fool us.
Anything intelligent in the sense we mean it, will compete with us the way other creatures compete with us.
And that is the last thing we want to bring into this world.
Ergo, an assertion that the first law of decidability is that property-in-toto may not be violated – no involuntary cost may be imposed by action or inaction against property in toto.
Ergo, an assertion that the second law of decidability is that any agent capable of choice or action, must be monitored by a non-sentient moral agent that prohibits the cognizance of, or action upon, any cost that wold be imposed involuntarily against property in toto.
This agent can cause analogy to pain (cost) upon any concept or action that would prohibit the calculation (use of) that memory or concept that imposes cost, and prohibit entirely action that would impose an involuntary cost.
Source date (UTC): 2016-05-23 12:00:00 UTC
-
COMPUTABILITY VS CALCULABILITY VS PROBABILITY VS IMAGINABILITY Computability, ca
COMPUTABILITY VS CALCULABILITY VS PROBABILITY VS IMAGINABILITY
Computability, calculability and probability and imaginability are four different things.
Equations are calculable by human beings.
Equations may or may not be computable by machines.
Calculations may include deduction, and humans can perform them.
Computations do not involve deduction, and machines can perform them.
Probability does not involve deduction but induction (guessing).
Imagination does not involve deduction or induction (guessing), but free association.
Computable > Calculable > Probable > Imaginable > Unimaginable.
Source date (UTC): 2016-05-17 09:50:00 UTC
-
Meaningful/Decidable: Meaningful: Can I find a path (imaginary)? Decidable: this
Meaningful/Decidable: Meaningful: Can I find a path (imaginary)? Decidable: this is an existentially possible path (operational)? #NewRight
Source date (UTC): 2016-05-16 09:22:56 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/732139259013009408
-
Meaningful/Decidable: Meaningful: Can I find a path (imaginary)? Decidable: this
Meaningful/Decidable: Meaningful: Can I find a path (imaginary)? Decidable: this is an existentially possible path (operational)? #NewRight
Source date (UTC): 2016-05-16 05:22:00 UTC
-
MEANINGFUL VS DECIDABLE Meaningful: can I find a path (guess). Decidable: this i
MEANINGFUL VS DECIDABLE
Meaningful: can I find a path (guess). Decidable: this is an existentially possible path (operational).
Source date (UTC): 2016-05-16 05:20:00 UTC
-
DECIDABILITY: BY PREFERENCE, UTILITY, NECESSITY Whether you say “first cause”, “
DECIDABILITY: BY PREFERENCE, UTILITY, NECESSITY
Whether you say “first cause”, “metaphysics”, or “decidability”, you are using synonyms from different classes and eras and nothing more.
Whether you decide by preference, utility, or necessity is all that distinguishes decidable propositions.
Source date (UTC): 2016-05-16 04:28:00 UTC
-
TRUTH. CAN VS IS. (important) Since all general rules are informationally incomp
TRUTH. CAN VS IS.
(important)
Since all general rules are informationally incomplete until stated in a context of application, It is not that statements are, or are not true. It is that statements CAN or CANNOT be true. Where by “True” we mean, subjectively reconstructed rather than analytically correspondent.
Is True = Correspondent = Justificationism
Can be True = Reconstruction = Critical.
(Our language is a prison built of convenience, much of which is the fault of mathematics.)
“that can or cannot be true” is very different from “that is or is not true”.
Source date (UTC): 2016-04-25 23:25:00 UTC