Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Topic Proposal Issues
Syamsu 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5590 days)
Posts: 1914
From: amsterdam
Joined: 05-19-2002


Message 76 of 517 (201619)
04-23-2005 10:53 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by Admin
04-23-2005 8:58 AM


Re: decisions
evolutionist artificial intelligence:
---------------
procedure evolutionist
methodological naturalism=cause and effect
do while creationist (talking)=TRUE
........do sing(smurfsong)
........methodological_naturalism.confidence =
........methodological_naturalism.confidence +
........skepticism(methodological_naturalism)
enddo
return
function skepticism
parameter issue
if issue=cause and effect
.......confidence=1
else
.......confidence=-1
endif
return confidence
----------
Or in other words, while the creationist is talking, the evolutionist sings a lala song in their mind, and endlessly runs around the circle of increasing confidence in cause and effect, forgetting decision altogether.
Neither you, Jar, or Phat, as admins have given any really valid reasoning in denying the post.
regards,
Mohammad Nor Syamsu
This message has been edited by AdminAsgara, 04-23-2005 09:07 PM
This message has been edited by Syamsu, 04-24-2005 07:39 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Admin, posted 04-23-2005 8:58 AM Admin has seen this message but not replied

  
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 477 days)
Posts: 3645
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 77 of 517 (202030)
04-25-2005 12:52 AM


EvC Forum: The evidence of God
Take your time. Work with him. But essentially, please don't let this one slip away. I don't know how long my drugs will last before the itch to respond becomes critical.
It is now clear that he is a troubled young man. Please give him extra consideration. I'll be nice. I promise.

  
Syamsu 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5590 days)
Posts: 1914
From: amsterdam
Joined: 05-19-2002


Message 78 of 517 (202503)
04-26-2005 3:06 AM


Well whatever?!?!?!
Admins, give some pointer to how discuss events going one way or another, decision and the like, in the context of artificial intelligence.
I don't want to start some thread endlessly philosophizing if things really can go one way or another or not, of which threads there are many. I want to just assume that things can turn out one war or another, and make a workingmodel of choosing.
regards,
Mohammad Nor Syamsu

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by Adminnemooseus, posted 04-26-2005 4:11 AM Syamsu has replied

  
Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3974
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 79 of 517 (202511)
04-26-2005 4:11 AM
Reply to: Message 78 by Syamsu
04-26-2005 3:06 AM


Re: "Artificial intelligence, the decision way" "Proposed New Topic"
The topic in question apparently is Artificial intelligence, the decision way.
This topic had been rejected and closed.
That message 3 is mumbo-jumbo to me. I feel no urge to reconsider its rejection. If one of the other admins feel otherwise, they can reopen it, for futher consideration.
Adminnemooseus

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by Syamsu, posted 04-26-2005 3:06 AM Syamsu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by Syamsu, posted 04-27-2005 1:27 AM Adminnemooseus has not replied

  
Syamsu 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5590 days)
Posts: 1914
From: amsterdam
Joined: 05-19-2002


Message 80 of 517 (202894)
04-27-2005 1:27 AM
Reply to: Message 79 by Adminnemooseus
04-26-2005 4:11 AM


Re: "Artificial intelligence, the decision way" "Proposed New Topic"
That's admin no 4 (after Phat, Jar, Percy) giving another apparently useless comment.
I'm telling you there is basically no more straightforward way to focus on decisions in the context of artificial intelligence than I have done.
It is conspicuous that none of you give even a tiny hint of how this subject can be discussed. I think the problem is that the Admins lack acceptance of the subject of decision, as a matter of things turning out one way or another.
My defining is similar to the defining of other Intelligent Design Creationists (as referenced by Wounded King in some other thread). It is one of the main things in Intelligent Design theory, the decision is the point of creation. To cut out discussion of the subject of decision, is comparitively similar to if you would cut out discussion of natural selection on the evolutionist side. It is ridiculous.
How can you not get this???
I want to make a creative artifical intelligence, so OBVIOUSLY I would then focus the program on choosing. And the only part of the computer that possibly chooses (between 0 and 1), is the random function.
Again you must all be seriously deluded by science / methodological naturalism / evolutionism, not to comprehend or accept the merit of such a simple, straightforward and reasonable proposition.
regards,
Mohammad Nor Syamsu

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Adminnemooseus, posted 04-26-2005 4:11 AM Adminnemooseus has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by Ben!, posted 04-27-2005 1:45 AM Syamsu has replied
 Message 84 by Wounded King, posted 04-27-2005 4:29 AM Syamsu has not replied

  
Ben!
Member (Idle past 1398 days)
Posts: 1161
From: Hayward, CA
Joined: 10-14-2004


Message 81 of 517 (202896)
04-27-2005 1:45 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by Syamsu
04-27-2005 1:27 AM


Re: "Artificial intelligence, the decision way" "Proposed New Topic"
Syamsu,
Relax. I'm interested in artifical intelligence, so I was interested in your thread proposal. But surely, in order to go anywhere on your thread, "what is decision?" has to be discussed and agreed. So I went to your previous thread on decision.
I read pretty much the whole thread, and I didn't see anything constructive come out of it. Nobody (including myself) was convinced of the utility or reality of your use of the word "decision." Like I said above, without that, there's no grounds to discuss "decision and artificial intelligence."
My suggestion to you is, if you want to discuss artificial intelligence via decision, go back to your thread on decision and clear up the issues on decision. Focus less on the fact that you're having trouble convincing people and worries about politics, and focus more on the logic and usefulness of decision. Again, without consensus on decision, your "artificial intelligence and decision" thread will simply turn into ANOTHER decision thread. I think that's the point the admins are trying to make to you.
I hope you can appreciate this post, I don't have "political" ties like you keep accusing of others, but I really didn't agree with your explanations and conceptualization of "decision." If you have any questions about that, please put it in the "decision" thread, so I can respond to you appropriately there.
Ben

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by Syamsu, posted 04-27-2005 1:27 AM Syamsu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by Adminnemooseus, posted 04-27-2005 2:23 AM Ben! has not replied
 Message 83 by Syamsu, posted 04-27-2005 3:20 AM Ben! has not replied
 Message 85 by MangyTiger, posted 05-02-2005 12:36 AM Ben! has not replied

  
Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3974
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 82 of 517 (202900)
04-27-2005 2:23 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by Ben!
04-27-2005 1:45 AM


Re: "Artificial intelligence, the decision way" "Proposed New Topic"
Ben, you still have active admin status (actually "Director" status). If you would like to reopen the PNT in question, and try to turn it into something that can be released, go for it.
For whatever reason (and it could well be a personal intellectual deficiency), the topic is outside of my comprehension.
Adminnemooseus

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Ben!, posted 04-27-2005 1:45 AM Ben! has not replied

  
Syamsu 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5590 days)
Posts: 1914
From: amsterdam
Joined: 05-19-2002


Message 83 of 517 (202908)
04-27-2005 3:20 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by Ben!
04-27-2005 1:45 AM


Re: "Artificial intelligence, the decision way" "Proposed New Topic"
I don't feel like engaging in yet another philophical discussion about decision. I find Holmes' definition of free will for instance, incomprehensible (mulitple layers of inputs and outputs, and whatnot. just a lot of sophisticated looking catchwords put in a row without any explanation). That was the only alternative definition to decision presented so far, if I remember correctly.
That nobody here is convinced of the utility of the concept of 'a point where things turn out one way or another', or that they think this is not real..... is their problem.
I've discussed the philosophy about it long enough, I'm now just using a working definition, to develop something practical. A computerprogram which exists / runs by volition.
Of course there are no competing threads of people who have a different understanding of decision and artificial intelligence as I do, because I read on several places on the web that the search for artificial intelligence has failed (as a majority judgement of the scientists involved).
I superficially read some articles about artifical intelligence before, which talked about randomness being a focal point of the research into it. So I thought that AI researchers were already thinking along similar lines as I was. But recently I learned that the way the researchers used the randomness function, was only in a simplistic evolutionist/selectionist 'trial and error' sense.
So maybe what I offer now is a novel approach to artificial intelligence. It should have some interest certainly.
regards,
Mohammad Nor Syamsu
AdminBen: Taking this discussion out of this thread and to the PNT in question
This message has been edited by AdminBen, 05/02/2005 12:08 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Ben!, posted 04-27-2005 1:45 AM Ben! has not replied

  
Wounded King
Member
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 84 of 517 (202912)
04-27-2005 4:29 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by Syamsu
04-27-2005 1:27 AM


Re: "Artificial intelligence, the decision way" "Proposed New Topic"
My defining is similar to the defining of other Intelligent Design Creationists (as referenced by Wounded King in some other thread). It is one of the main things in Intelligent Design theory, the decision is the point of creation.
I only ever found one ID proponent who put forward a similar definition, although there may well be others. I don't think this neccessarily implies that it is one of the 'main things' in ID theory.
And I know this is not germaine to the purpose of this thread but I just have to say that Syamsu's understanding of Random number generation in computing may need some brushing up. There is even less basis for assuming any sort of true randomness operating in computing than in the universe in general.
TTFN,
WK
P.S. I'm sorry , I know this is totally inappropriate for this thread.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by Syamsu, posted 04-27-2005 1:27 AM Syamsu has not replied

  
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6353 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 85 of 517 (204222)
05-02-2005 12:36 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by Ben!
04-27-2005 1:45 AM


Re: "Artificial intelligence, the decision way" "Proposed New Topic"
Your admin alter ego replied to Syamsu over in PNT - but Percy has suspended Syamsu permanently.

The Tigers roared in Dublin - and I was there.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Ben!, posted 04-27-2005 1:45 AM Ben! has not replied

  
goldenlightArchangel
Member (Idle past 1152 days)
Posts: 583
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


Message 86 of 517 (206813)
05-10-2005 3:51 PM


Dear Admin
I did express myself in a format where anyone could understand when I said that the prophetic inscription was sealed/encoded.
In other words,
I did speak in a green format [plain English] in the time that I said that the whole inscription was red [sealed/encoded];
saying: "The proposal in this topic is to find out the meaning of sealed prophetic inscriptions. The prophecies in the last book of the scriptures have been sealed/encoded, and the sealed prophetic inscriptions would be an access key which may be used to decode/interpretate and find out whether the inscription is true [non-fictious] or not.
And the main focus of the topic is to find out whether is there a legitimacy in the sealed inscription or not."
*******
Regarding the reason for a rejection, there seems that one is rejecting not the topic, but is rejecting the sealed content which is the inscription itself.
*******
If I had a tendency to act or think according to religious inclinations as christians do have, I would reject the sealed inscription as well.
And as the English is not my first language, I find no basis for a rejection of the proposed new topic.
Sincerely,
Zsgeha Zsfira.

  
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 477 days)
Posts: 3645
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 87 of 517 (206890)
05-10-2005 10:47 PM


Please promote Jerry's new topic 10 Categories of Evidence For ID .
AJ said that
quote:
Very interesting post but I believe you failed to mention what exactly do you want to debate here. Can you please do that in a few words?
I disagree with this assessment.
Putting several other threads into consideration, there have been quite a few public outrcy for Jerry and several other IDists to give precise examples of the evidence that support ID. Jerry did exactly that.
Even though he did not literally say, "I want us to debate about blah blah blah...", there are enough material on there for people to begin analyzing in detail. I would agree more if the assessment was something like "this topic is too broad..."
If my post simple evidence for ID and Chris's rant Evidence for God came through, why did Jerry's proposed topic get put on hold?

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by Parasomnium, posted 05-11-2005 5:26 AM coffee_addict has not replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2224
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 88 of 517 (206941)
05-11-2005 5:26 AM
Reply to: Message 87 by coffee_addict
05-10-2005 10:47 PM


Promote Jerry's topic
Troy writes:
Please promote Jerry's new topic 10 Categories of Evidence For ID .
I agree.
I would like a chance to debate with Jerry, that is to say, if he's willing to confront me (I'll apologize and behave). I think his points are interesting and, as far as the content of the proposed debate, self-explanatory. He's also one of the better writers around here.
{edited to add "and behave"}
This message has been edited by Parasomnium, 11-May-2005 10:27 AM

We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further. - Richard Dawkins

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by coffee_addict, posted 05-10-2005 10:47 PM coffee_addict has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by AdminBen, posted 05-11-2005 6:59 AM Parasomnium has not replied

  
AdminBen
Inactive Member


Message 89 of 517 (206968)
05-11-2005 6:59 AM
Reply to: Message 88 by Parasomnium
05-11-2005 5:26 AM


Re: Promote Jerry's topic
Call me "the people's admin."
Note: this means that the topic has been promoted.
My work is done here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by Parasomnium, posted 05-11-2005 5:26 AM Parasomnium has not replied

  
Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3974
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 90 of 517 (208424)
05-15-2005 5:06 PM


For the record - Adminnemooseus blotch job at a "Proposed New Topic"
Please see message 4 of the "Robert Gentry: Granite as a "Genesis Rock"" topic.
I prematurely promoted the topic. The PNT version should have had a "suggestion for edit" reply from me.
My "patch" to fix the situation was to do an "edit for content" in message 1. As stated in message 4 there, this is a rare exception to the rule that "admins do not edit the content of the messages of others".
Adminnemooseus

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024