Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

The key elements in human thinking are not numbers but labels of fuzzy sets. -- L. Zadeh


interests / alt.language.latin / Re: impressive Latin chatbot

SubjectAuthor
* impressive Latin chatbotBtraven
+- Re: impressive Latin chatbotA.T. Murray
`* Re: impressive Latin chatbotEd Cryer
 `* Re: impressive Latin chatbotBtraven
  `* Re: impressive Latin chatbotEd Cryer
   +* Re: impressive Latin chatbotcoelum.cornucopia
   |`- Re: impressive Latin chatbotEd Cryer
   `* Re: impressive Latin chatbotBtraven
    `- Re: impressive Latin chatbotEd Cryer

1
impressive Latin chatbot

<8af907f6-0c15-4702-98c4-ba2c7411712dn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/interests/article-flat.php?id=327&group=alt.language.latin#327

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.language.latin
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:852:b0:6fe:d744:c83f with SMTP id u18-20020a05620a085200b006fed744c83fmr2082886qku.175.1672702886173;
Mon, 02 Jan 2023 15:41:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6902:3ce:b0:6f8:92de:92e3 with SMTP id
g14-20020a05690203ce00b006f892de92e3mr4094210ybs.105.1672702885856; Mon, 02
Jan 2023 15:41:25 -0800 (PST)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: alt.language.latin
Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2023 15:41:25 -0800 (PST)
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2601:603:300:cce0:0:0:0:afdf;
posting-account=8HrM_goAAAAuH1_yz57SxSm6tiWMHxct
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2601:603:300:cce0:0:0:0:afdf
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <8af907f6-0c15-4702-98c4-ba2c7411712dn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: impressive Latin chatbot
From: caud...@gmail.com (Btraven)
Injection-Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2023 23:41:26 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 by: Btraven - Mon, 2 Jan 2023 23:41 UTC

See a demo of a simulated conversation between machine and man, Latine utique. The illusion is the same one witnessed by Weizenbaum's secretary in 1966. Fifty years later programs can access much larger dictionaries and text corpora and have more sophisticated syntax analysis. Intelligence is, of course, out of the question. It's mostly lookup and stochastic process modeling. In real life the most meaningful texts are the least likely; in AI land the most "meaningful" texts are the most likely to be stored and regurgitated.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA

but now also:

https://youtu.be/lAqKiaZukps

Btraven

p.s. The program "considers" its interlocutor to be a thing. 'Humanum' is used as a neuter vocative as in Byron's "roll on thou dark and deep blue ocean."

Re: impressive Latin chatbot

<c851ccb2-e379-40ac-bfff-d7008fe82c87n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/interests/article-flat.php?id=328&group=alt.language.latin#328

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.language.latin
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:72c2:0:b0:3a9:88b3:f2f2 with SMTP id o2-20020ac872c2000000b003a988b3f2f2mr1577436qtp.616.1672721344021;
Mon, 02 Jan 2023 20:49:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 2002:a81:9e05:0:b0:459:6fe3:fd8a with SMTP id
m5-20020a819e05000000b004596fe3fd8amr4932689ywj.319.1672721343764; Mon, 02
Jan 2023 20:49:03 -0800 (PST)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: alt.language.latin
Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2023 20:49:03 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <8af907f6-0c15-4702-98c4-ba2c7411712dn@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=73.254.108.24; posting-account=rS-ITgoAAAC4XLmmHKI5_C5lMSeqZBAF
NNTP-Posting-Host: 73.254.108.24
References: <8af907f6-0c15-4702-98c4-ba2c7411712dn@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <c851ccb2-e379-40ac-bfff-d7008fe82c87n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: impressive Latin chatbot
From: mentific...@gmail.com (A.T. Murray)
Injection-Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2023 04:49:04 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 2381
 by: A.T. Murray - Tue, 3 Jan 2023 04:49 UTC

On Monday, January 2, 2023 at 3:41:26 PM UTC-8, Btraven wrote:
> See a demo of a simulated conversation between machine and man, Latine utique. The illusion is the same one witnessed by Weizenbaum's secretary in 1966. Fifty years later programs can access much larger dictionaries and text corpora and have more sophisticated syntax analysis. Intelligence is, of course, out of the question. It's mostly lookup and stochastic process modeling. In real life the most meaningful texts are the least likely; in AI land the most "meaningful" texts are the most likely to be stored and regurgitated.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA
>
> but now also:
>
> https://youtu.be/lAqKiaZukps
>
> Btraven
>
> p.s. The program "considers" its interlocutor to be a thing. 'Humanum' is used as a neuter vocative as in Byron's "roll on thou dark and deep blue ocean."

The Mentifex mens.html AI Mind in ancient Latin actually does think in ancient Latin.
It uses concepts and their relationships to express and to understand ideas in Latin.

https://ai.neocities.org/mens.html -- is the Latin AI Mind.for Microsoft Internet Explorer.

Re: impressive Latin chatbot

<tp10en$23rdl$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/interests/article-flat.php?id=329&group=alt.language.latin#329

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.language.latin
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ed...@somewhere.in.the.uk (Ed Cryer)
Newsgroups: alt.language.latin
Subject: Re: impressive Latin chatbot
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2023 10:35:12 +0000
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <tp10en$23rdl$1@dont-email.me>
References: <8af907f6-0c15-4702-98c4-ba2c7411712dn@googlegroups.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Injection-Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2023 10:36:07 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader01.eternal-september.org; posting-host="5349fdbf0d7dc5054491096bf46a64e4";
logging-data="2223541"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18+ZW6JBDHb+pIJJF9puFMb"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/102.6.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:dWjxY3XSXfS/FpeISl9Ctcr07nA=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <8af907f6-0c15-4702-98c4-ba2c7411712dn@googlegroups.com>
 by: Ed Cryer - Tue, 3 Jan 2023 10:35 UTC

Btraven wrote:
> See a demo of a simulated conversation between machine and man, Latine utique. The illusion is the same one witnessed by Weizenbaum's secretary in 1966. Fifty years later programs can access much larger dictionaries and text corpora and have more sophisticated syntax analysis. Intelligence is, of course, out of the question. It's mostly lookup and stochastic process modeling. In real life the most meaningful texts are the least likely; in AI land the most "meaningful" texts are the most likely to be stored and regurgitated.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA
>
> but now also:
>
> https://youtu.be/lAqKiaZukps
>
> Btraven
>
> p.s. The program "considers" its interlocutor to be a thing. 'Humanum' is used as a neuter vocative as in Byron's "roll on thou dark and deep blue ocean."
The old "Turing Test" was more impressive than this. It was famous all
over UK philosophy and psychology university departments when I was
studying in the 1990s.
BTW, à propos de John Searle's Chinese Room Gedankenexperiment, it's
always struck me that what he complains about is the absence of
"understanding" in his simple AI model. Well, he should add a concept of
secondary cognition (awareness of awareness, self-knowledge, a loop into
the brain from a higher position); "understanding" will reside there.
Our mind is just such in relation to the brain generally; that's where
self-awareness resides, where the higher cognitive faculties have play.
To "understand" is to place things in a hierarchy of knowledge, and that
is what I call "mind". Latin distinction between "mens", "animus",
"anima" and "sui conscientia".
Ed

Re: impressive Latin chatbot

<3e47d0e8-d5f8-423a-a9c1-a5d8cc5d5821n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/interests/article-flat.php?id=332&group=alt.language.latin#332

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.language.latin
X-Received: by 2002:ad4:402c:0:b0:531:c330:e7d6 with SMTP id q12-20020ad4402c000000b00531c330e7d6mr1763232qvp.80.1673152603126;
Sat, 07 Jan 2023 20:36:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 2002:a81:75c6:0:b0:488:77b3:6b94 with SMTP id
q189-20020a8175c6000000b0048877b36b94mr5004548ywc.392.1673152602903; Sat, 07
Jan 2023 20:36:42 -0800 (PST)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: alt.language.latin
Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2023 20:36:42 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <tp10en$23rdl$1@dont-email.me>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2601:603:300:cce0:0:0:0:afdf;
posting-account=8HrM_goAAAAuH1_yz57SxSm6tiWMHxct
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2601:603:300:cce0:0:0:0:afdf
References: <8af907f6-0c15-4702-98c4-ba2c7411712dn@googlegroups.com> <tp10en$23rdl$1@dont-email.me>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <3e47d0e8-d5f8-423a-a9c1-a5d8cc5d5821n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: impressive Latin chatbot
From: caud...@gmail.com (Btraven)
Injection-Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2023 04:36:43 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 4951
 by: Btraven - Sun, 8 Jan 2023 04:36 UTC

On Tuesday, January 3, 2023 at 2:36:09 AM UTC-8, Ed Cryer wrote:
> Btraven wrote:
> > See a demo of a simulated conversation between machine and man, Latine utique. The illusion is the same one witnessed by Weizenbaum's secretary in 1966. Fifty years later programs can access much larger dictionaries and text corpora and have more sophisticated syntax analysis. Intelligence is, of course, out of the question. It's mostly lookup and stochastic process modeling. In real life the most meaningful texts are the least likely; in AI land the most "meaningful" texts are the most likely to be stored and regurgitated.
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA
> >
> > but now also:
> >
> > https://youtu.be/lAqKiaZukps
> >
> > Btraven
> >
> > p.s. The program "considers" its interlocutor to be a thing. 'Humanum' is used as a neuter vocative as in Byron's "roll on thou dark and deep blue ocean."

> The old "Turing Test" was more impressive than this. It was famous all
> over UK philosophy and psychology university departments when I was
> studying in the 1990s.
>

In principle the Turing test is the same: its criterion of success is based on convincing the human mind. Turing imagines a suitably sophisticated witness of seemingly goal directed output (imagine an observer of a robot walking on a tight rope and imagining that the robot is feeling fear of falling or maybe even wishing to be admired for its poise and grace). If the performance can be made arbitrarily perfectable we can eventually forgive the observer for being duped. Even then there is no justification for believing that the robot's insideness rises to the level of ego consciousness even if the simulated state incorporates recursive functions that examine themselves. All computable functions need a halting condition.
A real consciousness doesn't need this because it is founded on truly infinite regress. Of course in a real consciousness almost all of the recursion is unconscious, that unplumbable abyss. Perception is not identical to reality but is only a partial, abstracting sampling of a few salient features, always local. The wholeness of reality is always only imaginable, not perceivable. The hierarchy that you posit is always full of gaps, category errors, wishful thinking, every kind of trap, maze, and cul-de-sac of self deception. A nine year old fan of science fiction might be hoodwinked into believing that an algorithm might somehow realize that it is only an algorithm hoping to be able to wish to improve itself, but no serious mature psychologist ever will believe such a scenario. It does not compute. AI won't be able to fake it til it makes it but it could cause a lot of trouble before we pull the plug on it.
The trouble is mainly the outcome of habitual mendacity. It vitiates perception and hollows out imagination.

bt

> BTW, à propos de John Searle's Chinese Room Gedankenexperiment, it's
> always struck me that what he complains about is the absence of
> "understanding" in his simple AI model. Well, he should add a concept of
> secondary cognition (awareness of awareness, self-knowledge, a loop into
> the brain from a higher position); "understanding" will reside there.
> Our mind is just such in relation to the brain generally; that's where
> self-awareness resides, where the higher cognitive faculties have play.
> To "understand" is to place things in a hierarchy of knowledge, and that
> is what I call "mind". Latin distinction between "mens", "animus",
> "anima" and "sui conscientia".
>
> Ed

Re: impressive Latin chatbot

<tph0eh$6ebv$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/interests/article-flat.php?id=335&group=alt.language.latin#335

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.language.latin
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ed...@somewhere.in.the.uk (Ed Cryer)
Newsgroups: alt.language.latin
Subject: Re: impressive Latin chatbot
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2023 12:13:51 +0000
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 51
Message-ID: <tph0eh$6ebv$1@dont-email.me>
References: <8af907f6-0c15-4702-98c4-ba2c7411712dn@googlegroups.com>
<tp10en$23rdl$1@dont-email.me>
<3e47d0e8-d5f8-423a-a9c1-a5d8cc5d5821n@googlegroups.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2023 12:14:09 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader01.eternal-september.org; posting-host="45192dba911a3de09296042489f715cb";
logging-data="211327"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/viOhkPlHJTj7inTtLWjID"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/102.6.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ZCkw84aPum18b6q475hPMov0qac=
In-Reply-To: <3e47d0e8-d5f8-423a-a9c1-a5d8cc5d5821n@googlegroups.com>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: Ed Cryer - Mon, 9 Jan 2023 12:13 UTC

Btraven wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 3, 2023 at 2:36:09 AM UTC-8, Ed Cryer wrote:
>> Btraven wrote:
>>> See a demo of a simulated conversation between machine and man, Latine utique. The illusion is the same one witnessed by Weizenbaum's secretary in 1966. Fifty years later programs can access much larger dictionaries and text corpora and have more sophisticated syntax analysis. Intelligence is, of course, out of the question. It's mostly lookup and stochastic process modeling. In real life the most meaningful texts are the least likely; in AI land the most "meaningful" texts are the most likely to be stored and regurgitated.
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA
>>>
>>> but now also:
>>>
>>> https://youtu.be/lAqKiaZukps
>>>
>>> Btraven
>>>
>>> p.s. The program "considers" its interlocutor to be a thing. 'Humanum' is used as a neuter vocative as in Byron's "roll on thou dark and deep blue ocean."
>
>> The old "Turing Test" was more impressive than this. It was famous all
>> over UK philosophy and psychology university departments when I was
>> studying in the 1990s.
>>
>
> In principle the Turing test is the same: its criterion of success is based on convincing the human mind. Turing imagines a suitably sophisticated witness of seemingly goal directed output (imagine an observer of a robot walking on a tight rope and imagining that the robot is feeling fear of falling or maybe even wishing to be admired for its poise and grace). If the performance can be made arbitrarily perfectable we can eventually forgive the observer for being duped. Even then there is no justification for believing that the robot's insideness rises to the level of ego consciousness even if the simulated state incorporates recursive functions that examine themselves. All computable functions need a halting condition.
> A real consciousness doesn't need this because it is founded on truly infinite regress. Of course in a real consciousness almost all of the recursion is unconscious, that unplumbable abyss. Perception is not identical to reality but is only a partial, abstracting sampling of a few salient features, always local. The wholeness of reality is always only imaginable, not perceivable. The hierarchy that you posit is always full of gaps, category errors, wishful thinking, every kind of trap, maze, and cul-de-sac of self deception. A nine year old fan of science fiction might be hoodwinked into believing that an algorithm might somehow realize that it is only an algorithm hoping to be able to wish to improve itself, but no serious mature psychologist ever will believe such a scenario. It does not compute. AI won't be able to fake it til it makes it but it could cause a lot of trouble before we pull the plug on it.
> The trouble is mainly the outcome of habitual mendacity. It vitiates perception and hollows out imagination.
>
> bt
>

"Mind" baffles science and philosophy. I once read a book from the 1920s
entitled "Theories of Mind". There were twenty-odd in it. *
However, I think it's beyond doubt that it is causally connected with
the brain; more a function of the brain rather than guiding it, and
associated with animals with larger brains and more social interaction.
Observe the hierarchy of animals; worms through to homo sapiens; do
slugs have mind?, squirrels?, cats? They have intelligent functions
within their survival niche and (in my opinion) varying degrees of mind;
some with none, but they function.

Don't be misled by human prejudice of "soul"; nor by the fact that we
essentially are our mind (cogitamus ergo sumus) with its higher
cognitive abilities, feelings and self-awareness. I love and respect
them as much as most, but I refuse to be led into supernaturalism,
ghosts, gods and mysteries. I'm a product of the great age of science, a
western scientific rationalist.

Ed

* That book is seared onto my memory for having a final chapter "Is Life
Worthwhile?" I never figured out its reason for being there, but there's
something so unutterably amusing about its presence that it sends a wave
of happiness throughout my whole being just to recall it.

Re: impressive Latin chatbot

<63bd610b$0$25944$426a74cc@news.free.fr>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/interests/article-flat.php?id=336&group=alt.language.latin#336

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.language.latin
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!cleanfeed3-b.proxad.net!nnrp1-2.free.fr!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: impressive Latin chatbot
To: Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk>
Newsgroups: alt.language.latin
References: <8af907f6-0c15-4702-98c4-ba2c7411712dn@googlegroups.com>
<tp10en$23rdl$1@dont-email.me>
<3e47d0e8-d5f8-423a-a9c1-a5d8cc5d5821n@googlegroups.com>
<tph0eh$6ebv$1@dont-email.me>
From: coelum.c...@free.fr
Openpgp: preference=signencrypt
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2023 13:58:52 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/52.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <tph0eh$6ebv$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: fr
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <63bd610b$0$25944$426a74cc@news.free.fr>
Organization: Guest of ProXad - France
NNTP-Posting-Date: 10 Jan 2023 13:58:51 CET
NNTP-Posting-Host: 80.215.210.170
X-Trace: 1673355531 news-2.free.fr 25944 80.215.210.170:3406
X-Complaints-To: abuse@proxad.net
 by: coelum.c...@free.fr - Tue, 10 Jan 2023 12:58 UTC

Le 09/01/2023 à 13:13, Ed Cryer a écrit :
> Theories of Mind

Is this the book you're talking about?

https://openlibrary.org/works/OL237844W/A_theory_of_mind?edition=key%3A/books/OL7191690M

Re: impressive Latin chatbot

<tpkedd$k85i$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/interests/article-flat.php?id=337&group=alt.language.latin#337

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.language.latin
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ed...@somewhere.in.the.uk (Ed Cryer)
Newsgroups: alt.language.latin
Subject: Re: impressive Latin chatbot
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2023 19:30:38 +0000
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <tpkedd$k85i$1@dont-email.me>
References: <8af907f6-0c15-4702-98c4-ba2c7411712dn@googlegroups.com>
<tp10en$23rdl$1@dont-email.me>
<3e47d0e8-d5f8-423a-a9c1-a5d8cc5d5821n@googlegroups.com>
<tph0eh$6ebv$1@dont-email.me> <63bd610b$0$25944$426a74cc@news.free.fr>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Injection-Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2023 19:30:53 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader01.eternal-september.org; posting-host="8ee5efda60c7a8cbca48a0b5ac77f841";
logging-data="663730"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19h2+yDsIlxe7k3RzAOZkJk"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/102.6.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:91Vnbj2PsXpAVBH8d2qCPiWw3lY=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <63bd610b$0$25944$426a74cc@news.free.fr>
 by: Ed Cryer - Tue, 10 Jan 2023 19:30 UTC

coelum.cornucopia@free.fr wrote:
> Le 09/01/2023 à 13:13, Ed Cryer a écrit :
>> Theories of Mind
>
> Is this the book you're talking about?
>
> https://openlibrary.org/works/OL237844W/A_theory_of_mind?edition=key%3A/books/OL7191690M
No. Nothing like it.
The one I recall was a university text book, all the contemporary
theories of Mind chapter by chapter.
Ed

Re: impressive Latin chatbot

<101d9fe7-0d89-4816-824c-e441f60bfd85n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/interests/article-flat.php?id=350&group=alt.language.latin#350

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.language.latin
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:4792:0:b0:3b6:3c95:7351 with SMTP id k18-20020ac84792000000b003b63c957351mr178121qtq.594.1674012085109;
Tue, 17 Jan 2023 19:21:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:a523:0:b0:7f2:41b2:bde9 with SMTP id
h32-20020a25a523000000b007f241b2bde9mr419110ybi.319.1674012084832; Tue, 17
Jan 2023 19:21:24 -0800 (PST)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: alt.language.latin
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2023 19:21:24 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <tph0eh$6ebv$1@dont-email.me>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2601:603:301:bf0:0:0:0:f0cd;
posting-account=8HrM_goAAAAuH1_yz57SxSm6tiWMHxct
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2601:603:301:bf0:0:0:0:f0cd
References: <8af907f6-0c15-4702-98c4-ba2c7411712dn@googlegroups.com>
<tp10en$23rdl$1@dont-email.me> <3e47d0e8-d5f8-423a-a9c1-a5d8cc5d5821n@googlegroups.com>
<tph0eh$6ebv$1@dont-email.me>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <101d9fe7-0d89-4816-824c-e441f60bfd85n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: impressive Latin chatbot
From: caud...@gmail.com (Btraven)
Injection-Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2023 03:21:25 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 10670
 by: Btraven - Wed, 18 Jan 2023 03:21 UTC

On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:14:11 AM UTC-8, Ed Cryer wrote:
> Btraven wrote:
> > On Tuesday, January 3, 2023 at 2:36:09 AM UTC-8, Ed Cryer wrote:
> >> Btraven wrote:
> >>> See a demo of a simulated conversation between machine and man, Latine utique. The illusion is the same one witnessed by Weizenbaum's secretary in 1966. Fifty years later programs can access much larger dictionaries and text corpora and have more sophisticated syntax analysis. Intelligence is, of course, out of the question. It's mostly lookup and stochastic process modeling. In real life the most meaningful texts are the least likely; in AI land the most "meaningful" texts are the most likely to be stored and regurgitated.
> >>>
> >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA
> >>>
> >>> but now also:
> >>>
> >>> https://youtu.be/lAqKiaZukps
> >>>
> >>> Btraven
> >>>
> >>> p.s. The program "considers" its interlocutor to be a thing. 'Humanum' is used as a neuter vocative as in Byron's "roll on thou dark and deep blue ocean."
> >
> >> The old "Turing Test" was more impressive than this. It was famous all
> >> over UK philosophy and psychology university departments when I was
> >> studying in the 1990s.
> >>
> >
> > In principle the Turing test is the same: its criterion of success is based on convincing the human mind. Turing imagines a suitably sophisticated witness of seemingly goal directed output (imagine an observer of a robot walking on a tight rope and imagining that the robot is feeling fear of falling or maybe even wishing to be admired for its poise and grace). If the performance can be made arbitrarily perfectable we can eventually forgive the observer for being duped. Even then there is no justification for believing that the robot's insideness rises to the level of ego consciousness even if the simulated state incorporates recursive functions that examine themselves. All computable functions need a halting condition.
> > A real consciousness doesn't need this because it is founded on truly infinite regress. Of course in a real consciousness almost all of the recursion is unconscious, that unplumbable abyss. Perception is not identical to reality but is only a partial, abstracting sampling of a few salient features, always local. The wholeness of reality is always only imaginable, not perceivable. The hierarchy that you posit is always full of gaps, category errors, wishful thinking, every kind of trap, maze, and cul-de-sac of self deception. A nine year old fan of science fiction might be hoodwinked into believing that an algorithm might somehow realize that it is only an algorithm hoping to be able to wish to improve itself, but no serious mature psychologist ever will believe such a scenario. It does not compute. AI won't be able to fake it til it makes it but it could cause a lot of trouble before we pull the plug on it.
> > The trouble is mainly the outcome of habitual mendacity. It vitiates perception and hollows out imagination.
> >
> > bt
> >
> "Mind" baffles science and philosophy. I once read a book from the 1920s
> entitled "Theories of Mind". There were twenty-odd in it. *
> However, I think it's beyond doubt that it is causally connected with
> the brain; more a function of the brain rather than guiding it, and
> associated with animals with larger brains and more social interaction.
> Observe the hierarchy of animals; worms through to homo sapiens; do
> slugs have mind?, squirrels?, cats? They have intelligent functions
> within their survival niche and (in my opinion) varying degrees of mind;
> some with none, but they function.
>
> Don't be misled by human prejudice of "soul"; nor by the fact that we
> essentially are our mind (cogitamus ergo sumus) with its higher
> cognitive abilities, feelings and self-awareness. I love and respect
> them as much as most, but I refuse to be led into supernaturalism,
> ghosts, gods and mysteries. I'm a product of the great age of science, a
> western scientific rationalist.
>
> Ed
>
> * That book is seared onto my memory for having a final chapter "Is Life
> Worthwhile?" I never figured out its reason for being there, but there's
> something so unutterably amusing about its presence that it sends a wave
> of happiness throughout my whole being just to recall it.

I think I have at least identified the source of that final chapter. Here are the first paragraphs out of about 30 pages:
"
IS LIFE WORTH LIVING? ¹
By WILLIAM JAMES.

When Mr. Mallock's book with this title appeared some
fifteen years ago, the jocose answer that "it depends on the liver" had great currency in the newspapers. The answer that I propose to give cannot be jocose. In the
words of one of Shakespeare's prologues,

"I come no more to make you laugh; things now,
That bear a weighty and a serious brow,
Sad, high, and working, full of state and woe,"

must be my theme. In the deepest heart of all of us there is a corner in which the ultimate mystery of things works sadly, and I know not what such an Association as yours intends nor what you ask of those whom you invite to address you, unless it be to lead you from the surface-glamour of existence and for an hour at least to make you heedless to the buzzing and jigging and vibration of small interests and excitements that form the tissue of our ordinary consciousness. Without further explanation or apology, then, I ask you to join me in turning an attention, commonly too unwilling, to the profounder bass-note of life. Let us search the lonely depths for an hour together and see what answers in the last folds and recesses of things our question may find.

¹ An address given before the Young Men's Christian Association of Harvard University and the Philadelphia Society for Ethical Culture. In order to meet a constant demand, it is reprinted. by permission, from the International Journal of Ethics for October, 1895.
"
Apparently there was also a book with that title published sometime in the late 19th century. The only anthologies with titles incorporating "theories of mind" that I was able to track down were "Six theories of mind" by Charles Morris (1932) and "Theories of the mind" by Stephen Priest (1991). From what was exposed of the latter by Google Books my interest was piqued enough that I bought a used copy from Abebooks.
Here's the toc:

1 DUALISM 1
Plato 8
The Cyclical Argument 8 The Recollection Argument 9
The Soul and the Forms 10 The Affinity Argument 11
The Argument from Opposites 15
Descartes 15
Existence and Essence 17 Two Substances 21
Identity and Difference 23 Clear and Distinct Ideas 28
Interaction 31 Union 33
2 LOGICAL BEHAVIOURISM 35
Hempel 37
The Vienna Circle 37 The Translation Project 39
A Pseudo-Problem 41
Ryle 43
The Ghost in the Machine 44 Category Mistakes 45
Dispositions 47 Occurrences 50 Introspection 50
One World 52

Wittgenstein 56
The Private Language Argument and the Philosophy of
Mind 57 Is Experience Private? 59
Is Meaning Private? 61

3 IDEALISM 65
Berkeley 71
Matter in Question 71 Qualities 75
Esse Est Percipi (To be is to be Perceived) 77 Minds 78
Hegel 80
The Critique of Dualism 81 Dialectic 83
Universal and Particular 85 Self-Consciousness 91
Master and Slave 92 Absolute Idealism 95
4 MATERIALISM 98
Place 102
A Scientific Hypothesis 102 Contingent Identities 105
A Scientific Hypothesis 102 Contingent Identities 105
Verifying Materialism 111 The Phenomenological Problem 112
Type-Type or Token-Token? 113
Davidson 115
Three Principles 115 Anomalous Monism 116
The Holism of the Mental 119
Materialism and Freedom 121
Honderich 122
Psychoneural Nomic Correlation 124
The Causation of Psychoneural Pairs 126
The Causation of Actions 128
Neuroscience and Quantum Mechanics 129
Life Hopes 131
5 FUNCTIONALISM 133
Putnam 137
Brain States and Pain States 137 Turing Machines 139
Functional States 141
Lewis 145
The Madman and the Martian 146 Causal Roles 147
Materialist Functionalism 148
6 DOUBLE ASPECT THEORY 150
Spinoza 154
One Substance 154 Individuals 156
God or Nature 156 Finitude 159
Russell 161
Neutral Monism 161 Matter 162 Mind 166 Sense Data 169
Strawson 170
Material Particulars 171 Three Theories of the Self 173
Persons 175 Two Kinds of Predicate 179
How is Dualism Thinkable? 181
7 THE PHENOMENOLOGICAL VIEW 182
Brentano 186
Mental and Physical Phenomena 187
Presentations 188 Outside Space 191
Intentionality 193 Inner Consciousness 197
Knowledge, Privacy and Time 199
CONTENTS
8 CONCLUSION: HOW TO SOLVE THE MIND-BODY
PROBLEM 210
rhat are Minds? 210 What are Mental and Physical? 212
What is Thinking? 213 What is Consciousness? 216
What is Subjectivity? 218 What is Individuality? 220
What is the Self? 221 What is Matter? 222


Click here to read the complete article
Re: impressive Latin chatbot

<tq8ftk$rbal$2@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/interests/article-flat.php?id=351&group=alt.language.latin#351

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.language.latin
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ed...@somewhere.in.the.uk (Ed Cryer)
Newsgroups: alt.language.latin
Subject: Re: impressive Latin chatbot
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2023 09:58:55 +0000
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 191
Message-ID: <tq8ftk$rbal$2@dont-email.me>
References: <8af907f6-0c15-4702-98c4-ba2c7411712dn@googlegroups.com>
<tp10en$23rdl$1@dont-email.me>
<3e47d0e8-d5f8-423a-a9c1-a5d8cc5d5821n@googlegroups.com>
<tph0eh$6ebv$1@dont-email.me>
<101d9fe7-0d89-4816-824c-e441f60bfd85n@googlegroups.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Injection-Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2023 09:59:16 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader01.eternal-september.org; posting-host="6166cd44b83ec7cbb41f0244687ba8d9";
logging-data="896341"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/QX6aCynLNDMMyf0mvwwM2"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/102.6.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:y2oLzHcLaAiRBl7P8yQvvFru+hs=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <101d9fe7-0d89-4816-824c-e441f60bfd85n@googlegroups.com>
 by: Ed Cryer - Wed, 18 Jan 2023 09:58 UTC

Btraven wrote:
> On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:14:11 AM UTC-8, Ed Cryer wrote:
>> Btraven wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, January 3, 2023 at 2:36:09 AM UTC-8, Ed Cryer wrote:
>>>> Btraven wrote:
>>>>> See a demo of a simulated conversation between machine and man, Latine utique. The illusion is the same one witnessed by Weizenbaum's secretary in 1966. Fifty years later programs can access much larger dictionaries and text corpora and have more sophisticated syntax analysis. Intelligence is, of course, out of the question. It's mostly lookup and stochastic process modeling. In real life the most meaningful texts are the least likely; in AI land the most "meaningful" texts are the most likely to be stored and regurgitated.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA
>>>>>
>>>>> but now also:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://youtu.be/lAqKiaZukps
>>>>>
>>>>> Btraven
>>>>>
>>>>> p.s. The program "considers" its interlocutor to be a thing. 'Humanum' is used as a neuter vocative as in Byron's "roll on thou dark and deep blue ocean."
>>>
>>>> The old "Turing Test" was more impressive than this. It was famous all
>>>> over UK philosophy and psychology university departments when I was
>>>> studying in the 1990s.
>>>>
>>>
>>> In principle the Turing test is the same: its criterion of success is based on convincing the human mind. Turing imagines a suitably sophisticated witness of seemingly goal directed output (imagine an observer of a robot walking on a tight rope and imagining that the robot is feeling fear of falling or maybe even wishing to be admired for its poise and grace). If the performance can be made arbitrarily perfectable we can eventually forgive the observer for being duped. Even then there is no justification for believing that the robot's insideness rises to the level of ego consciousness even if the simulated state incorporates recursive functions that examine themselves. All computable functions need a halting condition.
>>> A real consciousness doesn't need this because it is founded on truly infinite regress. Of course in a real consciousness almost all of the recursion is unconscious, that unplumbable abyss. Perception is not identical to reality but is only a partial, abstracting sampling of a few salient features, always local. The wholeness of reality is always only imaginable, not perceivable. The hierarchy that you posit is always full of gaps, category errors, wishful thinking, every kind of trap, maze, and cul-de-sac of self deception. A nine year old fan of science fiction might be hoodwinked into believing that an algorithm might somehow realize that it is only an algorithm hoping to be able to wish to improve itself, but no serious mature psychologist ever will believe such a scenario. It does not compute. AI won't be able to fake it til it makes it but it could cause a lot of trouble before we pull the plug on it.
>>> The trouble is mainly the outcome of habitual mendacity. It vitiates perception and hollows out imagination.
>>>
>>> bt
>>>
>> "Mind" baffles science and philosophy. I once read a book from the 1920s
>> entitled "Theories of Mind". There were twenty-odd in it. *
>> However, I think it's beyond doubt that it is causally connected with
>> the brain; more a function of the brain rather than guiding it, and
>> associated with animals with larger brains and more social interaction.
>> Observe the hierarchy of animals; worms through to homo sapiens; do
>> slugs have mind?, squirrels?, cats? They have intelligent functions
>> within their survival niche and (in my opinion) varying degrees of mind;
>> some with none, but they function.
>>
>> Don't be misled by human prejudice of "soul"; nor by the fact that we
>> essentially are our mind (cogitamus ergo sumus) with its higher
>> cognitive abilities, feelings and self-awareness. I love and respect
>> them as much as most, but I refuse to be led into supernaturalism,
>> ghosts, gods and mysteries. I'm a product of the great age of science, a
>> western scientific rationalist.
>>
>> Ed
>>
>> * That book is seared onto my memory for having a final chapter "Is Life
>> Worthwhile?" I never figured out its reason for being there, but there's
>> something so unutterably amusing about its presence that it sends a wave
>> of happiness throughout my whole being just to recall it.
>
> I think I have at least identified the source of that final chapter. Here are the first paragraphs out of about 30 pages:
> "
> IS LIFE WORTH LIVING? ¹
> By WILLIAM JAMES.
>
> When Mr. Mallock's book with this title appeared some
> fifteen years ago, the jocose answer that "it depends on the liver" had great currency in the newspapers. The answer that I propose to give cannot be jocose. In the
> words of one of Shakespeare's prologues,
>
> "I come no more to make you laugh; things now,
> That bear a weighty and a serious brow,
> Sad, high, and working, full of state and woe,"
>
> must be my theme. In the deepest heart of all of us there is a corner in which the ultimate mystery of things works sadly, and I know not what such an Association as yours intends nor what you ask of those whom you invite to address you, unless it be to lead you from the surface-glamour of existence and for an hour at least to make you heedless to the buzzing and jigging and vibration of small interests and excitements that form the tissue of our ordinary consciousness. Without further explanation or apology, then, I ask you to join me in turning an attention, commonly too unwilling, to the profounder bass-note of life. Let us search the lonely depths for an hour together and see what answers in the last folds and recesses of things our question may find.
>
> ¹ An address given before the Young Men's Christian Association of Harvard University and the Philadelphia Society for Ethical Culture. In order to meet a constant demand, it is reprinted. by permission, from the International Journal of Ethics for October, 1895.
> "
> Apparently there was also a book with that title published sometime in the late 19th century. The only anthologies with titles incorporating "theories of mind" that I was able to track down were "Six theories of mind" by Charles Morris (1932) and "Theories of the mind" by Stephen Priest (1991). From what was exposed of the latter by Google Books my interest was piqued enough that I bought a used copy from Abebooks.
> Here's the toc:
>
> 1 DUALISM 1
> Plato 8
> The Cyclical Argument 8 The Recollection Argument 9
> The Soul and the Forms 10 The Affinity Argument 11
> The Argument from Opposites 15
> Descartes 15
> Existence and Essence 17 Two Substances 21
> Identity and Difference 23 Clear and Distinct Ideas 28
> Interaction 31 Union 33
> 2 LOGICAL BEHAVIOURISM 35
> Hempel 37
> The Vienna Circle 37 The Translation Project 39
> A Pseudo-Problem 41
> Ryle 43
> The Ghost in the Machine 44 Category Mistakes 45
> Dispositions 47 Occurrences 50 Introspection 50
> One World 52
>
> Wittgenstein 56
> The Private Language Argument and the Philosophy of
> Mind 57 Is Experience Private? 59
> Is Meaning Private? 61
>
> 3 IDEALISM 65
> Berkeley 71
> Matter in Question 71 Qualities 75
> Esse Est Percipi (To be is to be Perceived) 77 Minds 78
> Hegel 80
> The Critique of Dualism 81 Dialectic 83
> Universal and Particular 85 Self-Consciousness 91
> Master and Slave 92 Absolute Idealism 95
> 4 MATERIALISM 98
> Place 102
> A Scientific Hypothesis 102 Contingent Identities 105
> A Scientific Hypothesis 102 Contingent Identities 105
> Verifying Materialism 111 The Phenomenological Problem 112
> Type-Type or Token-Token? 113
> Davidson 115
> Three Principles 115 Anomalous Monism 116
> The Holism of the Mental 119
> Materialism and Freedom 121
> Honderich 122
> Psychoneural Nomic Correlation 124
> The Causation of Psychoneural Pairs 126
> The Causation of Actions 128
> Neuroscience and Quantum Mechanics 129
> Life Hopes 131
> 5 FUNCTIONALISM 133
> Putnam 137
> Brain States and Pain States 137 Turing Machines 139
> Functional States 141
> Lewis 145
> The Madman and the Martian 146 Causal Roles 147
> Materialist Functionalism 148
> 6 DOUBLE ASPECT THEORY 150
> Spinoza 154
> One Substance 154 Individuals 156
> God or Nature 156 Finitude 159
> Russell 161
> Neutral Monism 161 Matter 162 Mind 166 Sense Data 169
> Strawson 170
> Material Particulars 171 Three Theories of the Self 173
> Persons 175 Two Kinds of Predicate 179
> How is Dualism Thinkable? 181
> 7 THE PHENOMENOLOGICAL VIEW 182
> Brentano 186
> Mental and Physical Phenomena 187
> Presentations 188 Outside Space 191
> Intentionality 193 Inner Consciousness 197
> Knowledge, Privacy and Time 199
> CONTENTS
> 8 CONCLUSION: HOW TO SOLVE THE MIND-BODY
> PROBLEM 210
> rhat are Minds? 210 What are Mental and Physical? 212
> What is Thinking? 213 What is Consciousness? 216
> What is Subjectivity? 218 What is Individuality? 220
> What is the Self? 221 What is Matter? 222
>
> ******
> Here's the latest from the AI front. Finally AI is being turned against itself:
>
> https://text.npr.org/1149206188
>
> bt

Click here to read the complete article

1
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor