Super Artificial Intelligence, a naive approach

[Beelzebuddy]

Here are some other snippets you conveniently appeared to avoid

Notice how both of those quotes contain the word "inspired." Did you read my "garbage" post deeply enough to reach the bit where I said anything that claimed to be "inspired by" the brain was crap?

Deep learning is interesting because it works. And the reason it works has nothing to do with the inspiration to name its great-grandalgorithm after neurons back in the sixties, nor does that imply that deep learning networks are at all like neural function. Cause it ain't.

We can now view a couple of paragraphs of incoherent math word salad on a web site. So what?

So now we slack-jawed yokels are supposed to stare in dumbfounded amazement at his brilliance. Why, that's all greek to me, son, guess yer prolly got as much larnin' as ya say ya do!

He probably snows audiences from tumblr to youtube with this act, and hasn't quite caught on that it doesn't fly here.

 

[Reality Check]

So now we slack-jawed yokels are supposed to stare in dumbfounded amazement at his brilliance.

What is worse is that PDF does not even meet high school standards for a paper. A paper has many sections, e.g. abstract, contents, summary, discussion, appendixes, references. That PDF is 2 pages with an abstract, summary and 4 references - no contents at all !

 

[fagin]

No content describes most of this thread.

 

[abaddon]

No content describes most of this thread.

What do you expect when dealing with a self declared "programming god" who cannot distinguish between (or betwixt, even) UNC and URL?

 

[ProgrammingGodJordan]

Notice how both of those quotes contain the word "inspired." Did you read my "garbage" post deeply enough to reach the bit where I said anything that claimed to be "inspired by" the brain was crap?

Deep learning is interesting because it works. And the reason it works has nothing to do with the inspiration to name its great-grandalgorithm after neurons back in the sixties, nor does that imply that deep learning networks are at all like neural function. Cause it ain't.



So now we slack-jawed yokels are supposed to stare in dumbfounded amazement at his brilliance. Why, that's all greek to me, son, guess yer prolly got as much larnin' as ya say ya do!

He probably snows audiences from tumblr to youtube with this act, and hasn't quite caught on that it doesn't fly here.

More garbage writing of yours.

But if you meant people who half-ass it enough to put out a press release about how their system is "inspired by" the human brain, you'll have a line out the door. And all of them are crap.

Anyway, your quote above contradicts the data from the text you quoted.

 

[ProgrammingGodJordan]

No content describes most of this thread.

This may refer to your writing above:

Science -> as seen by layman (No content)
Science -> as seen by scientists (Science)

 

[fagin]

Nope, my comment was quite clearly directed at the content of this thread, and this thread alone.

It's a simple sentence, in simple English, and one even a mere mortal could understand.

I would expect a programming god to manage it.

Are you perhaps not quite as god like as you seem to imagine?

 

[Mojo]

Nope, my comment was quite clearly directed at the content of this thread, and this thread alone.

It's a simple sentence, in simple English, and one even a mere mortal could understand.

I would expect a programming god to manage it.

Are you perhaps not quite as god like as you seem to imagine?

The claim that he is a "minimally capable" god was, perhaps, an exaggeration.

 

[batpuncher]

What might that be?

That whole order-of-magnitude thing you have so much trouble with.

 

[ProgrammingGodJordan]

That whole order-of-magnitude thing you have so much trouble with.

There are other estimations for human level brain power in machines by at least 2020, beyond my own, as presented in the original post.

Albeit, the original post's focus is my supermanifold hypothesis.

 

[ProgrammingGodJordan]

Nope, my comment was quite clearly directed at the content of this thread, and this thread alone.

It's a simple sentence, in simple English, and one even a mere mortal could understand.

I would expect a programming god to manage it.

Are you perhaps not quite as god like as you seem to imagine?

What do you find problematic in my Super manifold hypothesis?

 

[fagin]

Sign up to read your garbage? I don't think so.

 

[Beelzebuddy]

Albeit, the original post's focus is my supermanifold hypothesis.

Your OP ended with

(vi)
Criticism is welcome/needed.

Criticism has been supplied. If you can't handle the criticism, that's your own problem.

 

[abaddon]

What do you find problematic in my Super manifold hypothesis?

It's garbage. That is the problem with your hypothesis.

 

[batpuncher]

There are other estimations for human level brain power in machines by at least 2020, beyond my own, as presented in the original post.

Albeit, the original post's focus is my supermanifold hypothesis.

What does that have to do with your improper comparisons?

 

[Reality Check]

Sign up to read your garbage? I don't think so.

If you scroll down in that web page you cans see the entire 2 pages of the incoherent math word salad that is that "hypothesis".

 

[Reality Check]

What do you find problematic in my Super manifold hypothesis?

That the hypothesis does not exist is a very big problem !

1. A PDF that does not meet the standards of a high school science paper.
2. A lie about having a hypothesis - you have few paragraphs of incoherent math word salad.
3. Guesses (even "reasonable") are not mathematics.
4. Actual gibberish, e.g. "Some tensor sequence of priors. (i.e. solid, liquid, gas)".

 

[ProgrammingGodJordan]

It's garbage. That is the problem with your hypothesis.

Are you familiar with the manifold hypothesis in deep learning?

 

[ProgrammingGodJordan]

That the hypothesis does not exist is a very big problem !

1. A PDF that does not meet the standards of a high school science paper.
2. A lie about having a hypothesis - you have few paragraphs of incoherent math word salad.
3. Guesses (even "reasonable") are not mathematics.
4. Actual gibberish, e.g. "Some tensor sequence of priors. (i.e. solid, liquid, gas)".

It is slightly beyond the hypothesis stage.

Here is some source code:
https://github.com/JordanMicahBennett/God

 

[ProgrammingGodJordan]

Your OP ended with

Criticism has been supplied. If you can't handle the criticism, that's your own problem.

Yes, but the criticism thus far has been worthless.