Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon.

Pages: 1-

What is your favourite cognitive model?

Name: Anonymous 2014-05-08 1:56

Douglas Hofstadter's Copycat cognitive model will be the basis of sentient AI. That is why the guy who used it to write a solver for Bongard problems took it down, fearing it's infinite power.

http://www.foundalis.com/res/diss_research.html

http://www.foundalis.com/soc/why_no_more_Bongard.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Metacat_demo_abc_abd_mrrjjj_mrrjjjj.jpg

Name: Anonymous 2014-05-08 2:06

http://cognitrn.psych.indiana.edu/rgoldsto/courses/concepts/copycat.pdf

Name: BruceB 2014-05-08 2:38

Hello there. How are you doing?

Let's see how the facts pertain to the reality of the situation.

.

ISSUE THE FIRST
======================================================

"Douglas Hofstadter's Copycat cognitive model will be the basis of sentient AI. That is why the guy who used it to write a solver for Bongard problems took it down, fearing it's infinite power." ------- Full Paragraph 1 of Original Post regarding "What is your favourite cognitive model?" by "Anonymous" 2014-05-08 03:56

======================================================

.

.

(1). All assertions are by definition baseless and your assertion of the non-fantasy possibility of "sentient AI." is a most baseless one.

(2). This cognitive model is what it is and that is an interesting mind-toy (not cognitive-toy ;) ). It has no possibility in the fantasy-possibility of the making of the fantasy of *simulating the human mind* a reality. This is due to many reasons that I may or may not explain later depending on your response.

(3). I think you are in fact seeing what isn't really there in the actions of the "guy" who most likely was playing a little joke or took it down for a technical reason. "infinite power"? Surely you're jesting.

Name: Anonymous 2014-05-08 2:54

>>3
1) I exaggerate for effect. This is the internet.
2) Agreed, to me it is an interesting mind-toy as well.
3) Looking at the internet archive, it appears there was never a time when his program was available. His thesis is still up. You would think there would be enough information in his thesis to reproduce the program. Maybe the program doesn't live up to his hype, and he is doing all this to manufacture interest in his non-existent or barely functional program.

Yes, I jest and say outrageous things. But if it is in the service of producing Good Discussion, is it not worthwhile?

Name: Anonymous 2014-05-08 3:11

I miss mentifix

Name: Anonymous 2014-05-08 3:33

http://www.foundalis.com/soc/why_no_more_Bongard.html
Diagnosis: anti-terrorist paranoia and general faggotry.
Treatment: stop watching Fox News you fat fucking american.

Name: Anonymous 2014-05-08 3:52

Mentifex has already solved AI , so what's your point?

Name: Anonymous 2014-05-08 3:55

>>6
You idiotic eurotrash teenager. That was a very liberal page I just read.

Name: Anonymous 2014-05-08 4:14

>>6
Yes, just as you read it: a number of human beings were turned to smoke and smithereens, and this pathetic journalist, whoever he is, speaking with the mentality of a 10-year-old who blows up his toy soldiers, reports in cold blood how people were turned to ashes by his favorite (“impressive”, yeah) military toys. Of course, for overgrown pre-teens like him, the SUV was not full of human beings, but of “al-Qaeda leaders” (as if he knew their ranks), of terrorists, sub-humans who aren’t worthy of living, who don’t have mothers to be devastated by their loss.
You think sympathy for explosive sandniggers is a very Faux Newzy thing to express? And I thought Nikita was out of touch.

Name: Anonymous 2014-05-08 4:25

>>6
That article reeks of unwarranted self importance, written by a deluded confused idiot who thinks his simple puzzle solving tool is some sort of revolutionary AI. If he believed all that bullshit he wrote, shouldn't he take his entire website down? Why is his thesis still available? Probably because he is a deluded shithead.

>>8,9
Who the fuck cares

Name: Anonymous 2014-05-08 4:51

Why are atheists a bunch of emotional pussies?

Name: Anonymous 2014-05-08 5:15

Why are theists a bunch of macho shitheads?

Name: Anonymous 2014-05-08 5:33

Consider this: a pack of ${adjective} ${variant}theists.

Name: Anonymous 2014-05-08 10:43

Consider this: a programming language without $s.

Name: Anonymous 2014-05-08 11:32

>>12

Cuz we have big balls and testosterone and the mighty of God helping us to stay virile, therefore it's natural that we use our strength to fuck feminised atheist gayboys, to inject our strong seed inside their vulgar boypussies, hold them down with our strong, hairy arms and make they bow before the mighty of our sword of Christ. Duch is the faith of the atheist, with long, smooth hair, pretty and androgynous face and body, and sensitive personality

Name: Anonymous 2014-05-08 11:45

>>15
What a fucking faggot.

Name: Anonymous 2014-05-08 13:28

Could we get back to the topic please? What cognitive models have you guys worked with? Have you made anything using them, even a very simple proof of concept or something just for practice?

Name: Anonymous 2014-05-08 13:49

>>1

http://www.foundalis.com/res/diss_research.html
Puzzles like that are typical of IQ tests, which frequently failed by human. Then again, these puzzles could be solved using statistics correlation, given that you parse these figures into sufficiently simple format (i.e. number of angles or topology). So the test by no mean prove any intelligence - just good statistics knowledge on the part of the AI's programmer.

Name: Anonymous 2014-05-08 13:51

>>18

IIRC, Hofstadter himself wrote a Lisp program capable of matching them.

Name: Anonymous 2014-05-08 15:21

ITT: Popular science

Name: Anonymous 2014-05-08 15:27

>>19
Hofstadter himself
himself

LOL

so you bought his fucking retarded book and believed the shit in it

Name: Anonymous 2014-05-08 15:31

le neil michio sagan face

Name: Anonymous 2014-05-08 15:33

>>21

I'm no OP.

Name: Anonymous 2014-05-08 15:36

>>22

Neil - NIGGER
Michio - CHINK
Sagan - JEW

Name: Anonymous 2014-05-08 20:31

>>18
The puzzle solving isn't the interesting aspect. You're right, there are other techniques for solving it. Its the simulation of the cognitive process that is interesting. For example, Hofstadter chose a simple letter string domain to demonstrate the model. Even for such a simple problem a complex concept network and library of codelets needs to be implemented. But watching the thing in operation on this simple problem is a thing of beauty. I am inspired to use this system for all sorts of things, AI or not.

Name: Anonymous 2014-05-10 10:45

Phaeaco’s source code: not provided
begone with your proprietary software!
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List
All trademarks and copyrights on this site are owned by their respective parties. All comments and posts are the responsibility of their own posters.
- Tinychan + 2ch Mode + RSS -