Are they alive?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

emmel wrote:
> On 2005-02-27, Thomas J. Boschloo <nospam@hccnet.nl.invalid> wrote:
>
>>emmel wrote:
>><snip>
>>
>>>Turn based intelligence. How... convincing. (It doesn't work, for
>>>heaven's sake. Turn based is nonsense.)
>>
>>Turn based? I meant to say 'Turing based'
>><hides behind bush>
>>Thomas
>
>
> Oh. Probably not much different. Depends mainly on the output and input
> devices, I think.

Did I say Turing based? Sorry, I meant Turn based 😛

Thomas
- --
"All my life, I've always wondered, What it would be like to fire a
ballistic missile" - Wonderfully colored plastic war toys, The Dead
Milkmen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQB5AwUBQinQUAEP2l8iXKAJAQHz6AMeI9E6osf5ppiIDCPzjOAhd6JWSKiwBaVZ
MQJThCuZ1xC4f1RSgx/2g77o3kLEuUuV7lOqEjGdOOxcOfTnN0JysUjWC8lmIKDR
qjAf2VtjYGwcQwoMNzW+j3zd0QeqMmpPZ4gHzA==
=C6g6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

bd wrote:
> Thomas J. Boschloo wrote:
> | bd wrote:
> |
> |>>Thomas J. Boschloo wrote:
> |>>| nornagon wrote:
> |>>|
> |>>|>>Here's something Steve Grand wrote way back in 1997
> |>>|>>(http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.games.creatures/browse_frm/thread/fa64f71ac3135322/6c80cec0c5d7dfe5?q=&_done=%2Fgroups%3Fenc_author%3DNEh2bRgAAABpnzTRIR4pTfVqJv-9flJkWKLNRqB-u4_S4z0CNL-NQg%26&_doneTitle=Back+to+Search&&d#6c80cec0c5d7dfe5)
>
> |>>
> |>>|
> |>>|
> |>>| <snipped long, but very interesting question>
> |>>|
> |>>|>>I thought I'd revive the question. What do we all think?
> |>>|
> |>>|
> |>>| You would need to device some kind of Turing Test where people are
> |>>| pretending to be Norns and other Norns are executed by a computer.
> If an
> |>>| observer can't tell the real Norns from the human operated Norns, the
> |>>| Norns should be considered alive.
> |>>|
> |>>| To put it another way: If a human can fool an observer into thinking
> |>>| that he or she is a Norn then the assumption that a Norn is not alive
> |>>| will result in the conclusion that the Human is also not alive.
> This is
> |>>| clearly false (but how do you proof Humans themselves are alive?),
> thus
> |>>| the opposite must be true and the Norns would be alive!
> |>>
> |>>Unfortunately, this doesn't quite work. To take it to an extreme:
> |>>Put a rock and a human ar computer consoles. Tell the human to pretend
> |>>to be a rock at a console. Since a person on the other end can't tell
> |>>the difference, by your logic, the rock must be alive.
> |
> |
> | I guess the test would be inconclusive in this case as there was nothing
> | to observe.
>
> Put a beetle or something in the driver's seat then
>
> |>>Intelligent life can reduce the extent of its capabilities it shows.
> |>>Because of this, your test fails.
> |
> |
> | You could also fake an IQ test to have a much lower score than your real
> | IQ. Still, the test is useful for determining someones intelligence. I
> | would be more worried about humans that would start philosophical
> | conversations with the keyboard operators instead of the usual 'Dab
> flib'.
>
> They are not following the test regime, certainly.
>
> |>>Moreover, if someone made a non-alive sentient thing of some sort (AI
> |>>program maybe?), would that not change the conclusion of the test if it
> |>>was connected instead of the human? Even though it may be acting
> |>>identically to the human?
> |
> |
> | My point would be that the non-alive sentient thing should be considered
> | alive since you cannot tell it from the real thing! That is the whole
> | point of the Turing test where an interrogator behind a terminal has to
> | tell a computer from a human by asking questions.
>
> There is a vital difference between your test and the turing test:
> - In the turing test, non-sentient things cannot emulate sentient
> things, and the sentient things are not trying to emulate non-sentient
> things (though they could).
> - In your test, while non-alive things are unable to emulate life, the
> alive things are trying their hardest to emulate non-life - and will
> quite probably succeed, with some practice.
>
> This invalidates the reasoning behind the test - namely, both sides try
> to act as sentient as possible and the one which is less sentient fails.
> In yours, one just does whatever while the other lowers itself to the
> first's level. There's really no correspondence.

Very true, but that brings us back to the original question: "Are norns
alive?". There must be some (psychological) test one that is clever
enough could devise. I think norns are very simple life forms, but I
don't know how to proof it :-(

Thomas
- --
"All my life, I've always wondered, What it would be like to fire a
ballistic missile" - Wonderfully colored plastic war toys, The Dead
Milkmen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQB5AwUBQinRjwEP2l8iXKAJAQFr1AMggF4N+AEphap4GsQSMPyEE4zC7INCNKL3
nFmZG+9IZJQQEQMldcTGCpUetgtmV4LMqsI1aH116RABGdRovRogAHuyyP7XbeBN
O4MWhuuBqMQzvRAlrt1m+eqXgx9RJmmDsiVFAQ==
=m4oq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

Thomas J. Boschloo wrote:
| bd wrote:
|
|>>Thomas J. Boschloo wrote:
|>>| bd wrote:
|>>|
|>>|>>Thomas J. Boschloo wrote:
|>>|>>| nornagon wrote:
|>>|>>|
|>>|>>|>>Here's something Steve Grand wrote way back in 1997
|>>|>>|>>(http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.games.creatures/browse_frm/thread/fa64f71ac3135322/6c80cec0c5d7dfe5?q=&_done=%2Fgroups%3Fenc_author%3DNEh2bRgAAABpnzTRIR4pTfVqJv-9flJkWKLNRqB-u4_S4z0CNL-NQg%26&_doneTitle=Back+to+Search&&d#6c80cec0c5d7dfe5)
|>>
|>>|>>
|>>|>>|
|>>|>>|
|>>|>>| <snipped long, but very interesting question>
|>>|>>|
|>>|>>|>>I thought I'd revive the question. What do we all think?
|>>|>>|
|>>|>>|
|>>|>>| You would need to device some kind of Turing Test where people are
|>>|>>| pretending to be Norns and other Norns are executed by a computer.
|>>If an
|>>|>>| observer can't tell the real Norns from the human operated
Norns, the
|>>|>>| Norns should be considered alive.
|>>|>>|
|>>|>>| To put it another way: If a human can fool an observer into thinking
|>>|>>| that he or she is a Norn then the assumption that a Norn is not
alive
|>>|>>| will result in the conclusion that the Human is also not alive.
|>>This is
|>>|>>| clearly false (but how do you proof Humans themselves are alive?),
|>>thus
|>>|>>| the opposite must be true and the Norns would be alive!
|>>|>>
|>>|>>Unfortunately, this doesn't quite work. To take it to an extreme:
|>>|>>Put a rock and a human ar computer consoles. Tell the human to pretend
|>>|>>to be a rock at a console. Since a person on the other end can't tell
|>>|>>the difference, by your logic, the rock must be alive.
|>>|
|>>|
|>>| I guess the test would be inconclusive in this case as there was
nothing
|>>| to observe.
|>>
|>>Put a beetle or something in the driver's seat then
|>>
|>>|>>Intelligent life can reduce the extent of its capabilities it shows.
|>>|>>Because of this, your test fails.
|>>|
|>>|
|>>| You could also fake an IQ test to have a much lower score than your
real
|>>| IQ. Still, the test is useful for determining someones intelligence. I
|>>| would be more worried about humans that would start philosophical
|>>| conversations with the keyboard operators instead of the usual 'Dab
|>>flib'.
|>>
|>>They are not following the test regime, certainly.
|>>
|>>|>>Moreover, if someone made a non-alive sentient thing of some sort (AI
|>>|>>program maybe?), would that not change the conclusion of the test
if it
|>>|>>was connected instead of the human? Even though it may be acting
|>>|>>identically to the human?
|>>|
|>>|
|>>| My point would be that the non-alive sentient thing should be
considered
|>>| alive since you cannot tell it from the real thing! That is the whole
|>>| point of the Turing test where an interrogator behind a terminal has to
|>>| tell a computer from a human by asking questions.
|>>
|>>There is a vital difference between your test and the turing test:
|>>- In the turing test, non-sentient things cannot emulate sentient
|>>things, and the sentient things are not trying to emulate non-sentient
|>>things (though they could).
|>>- In your test, while non-alive things are unable to emulate life, the
|>>alive things are trying their hardest to emulate non-life - and will
|>>quite probably succeed, with some practice.
|>>
|>>This invalidates the reasoning behind the test - namely, both sides try
|>>to act as sentient as possible and the one which is less sentient fails.
|>>In yours, one just does whatever while the other lowers itself to the
|>>first's level. There's really no correspondence.
|
|
| Very true, but that brings us back to the original question: "Are norns
| alive?". There must be some (psychological) test one that is clever
| enough could devise. I think norns are very simple life forms, but I
| don't know how to proof it :-(

Any behavioral test will likely fail, as life has very varied behavior.
The best way is to define life such that norns can be tested to see if
they fit the criteria.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0-ecc0.1.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQiplneBz3eKRGXGfAQP7FQf/R2IcCRKN7TUb9ZAOQ2+6AjPVy7VSJ4la
zQ1ya2sgmpp/3EqFaNHQOSeE/mGE8EnIAU3OEuW0oWjjle4tCQA2ZeCErDdRE+I1
0vICRn2+kfqEBWv1V7StvPyWs9+YMCNfWNP0JQX+jYOJUH+tFOt/7WwppB4u2A6F
Ozai7H4bOCF5uruQ9HlBHx9h/I6SKJe10ehzgiVTTXhgDPNegdiTWGf2s4bvQTIl
QpWL55eLcyEEBIql+znEvJAr8bbi7WKHlfSPNVp74SmNjRlZopDmh5xtOyDLUiyg
OlV1rvMDiYfZrwMus4P1pBNPT2zHJMZ78AfAKiKc9ph42dy+gMNOaA==
=zFPB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2005-03-05, Thomas J. Boschloo <nospam@hccnet.nl.invalid> wrote:
>
> emmel wrote:
>> On 2005-02-27, Thomas J. Boschloo <nospam@hccnet.nl.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>emmel wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 2005-02-27, Thomas J. Boschloo <nospam@hccnet.nl.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>emmel wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Bringing the ant out is probably more of a problem than dropping it. The
>>>>>>ant can survive the drop without any serious wounds, but it dies of
>>>>>>loosing contact (or not knowing the way back for that matter) to the
>>>>>>hive.
>>>>>
>>>>>Well, as long as the ant doesn't find its way back to my house and
>>>>>starts bringing along all its friends :-DD
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>And mark their ways with scents. Without these tracks they are pretty
>>>>much dead.
>>>
>>>I saw on television recently that they can also recognize large
>>>landmarks. I think my flat is a pretty good landmark but I drop them
>>>from the back of my flat 🙂
>>
>>
>> You are evil, do you know that? ;-)
>
> Maybe they will evolve into something move evolved next summer >🙂

Maybe they grow wings.

>>>Will have to do some experiments with ants next time!
>>>Thomas
>>
>>
>> Poor ants.
>
> At least I don't squish them with my tumb
> (on my white wallpaper)..

Tip-Ex
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better...
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2005-03-06, bd <bdonlan@bd.beginyourfear.com> wrote:
>
>| Very true, but that brings us back to the original question: "Are norns
>| alive?". There must be some (psychological) test one that is clever
>| enough could devise. I think norns are very simple life forms, but I
>| don't know how to proof it :-(
>
> Any behavioral test will likely fail, as life has very varied behavior.
> The best way is to define life such that norns can be tested to see if
> they fit the criteria.

That's of course the easiest way, but there's not much point in
adjusting your tests to your results. There *used* to be this definition
of life with reproducing and acting upon stimuli and metabolism and
stuff, but I'm pretty sure Norns don't fit in *there*.
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better...
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:slrnd2lf5d.e9l.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x5.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> On 2005-03-06, bd <bdonlan@bd.beginyourfear.com> wrote:
>>
>>| Very true, but that brings us back to the original question: "Are norns
>>| alive?". There must be some (psychological) test one that is clever
>>| enough could devise. I think norns are very simple life forms, but I
>>| don't know how to proof it :-(
>>
>> Any behavioral test will likely fail, as life has very varied behavior.
>> The best way is to define life such that norns can be tested to see if
>> they fit the criteria.
>
> That's of course the easiest way, but there's not much point in
> adjusting your tests to your results. There *used* to be this definition
> of life with reproducing and acting upon stimuli and metabolism and
> stuff, but I'm pretty sure Norns don't fit in *there*.

Don't they? Why not?

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:slrnd2h0g9.208.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x5.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> On 2005-03-04, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
>> news:slrnd2gda2.3j7.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x3.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>>> On 2005-03-03, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>>>> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:slrnd2dmkf.ag.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x4.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>>>>> On 2005-03-02, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>>>>>> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:slrnd28shj.s6b.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x4.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>>>>>>>>>> Ohh. Now, /that's/ interesting--particularly as they can't
>>>>>>>>>> actually
>>>>>>>>>> reproduce. Also, even if they could, could they actually evolve?
>>>>>>>>>> Actually,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> They can't? Are you *sure*? They were *cloned*, but not
>>>>>>>>> genetically
>>>>>>>>> engineered...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ehh. You've finished the game? Sorry to have to let you in on
>>>>>>>> this,
>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>> there were a few references to it in the first game, and it was
>>>>>>>> confirmed
>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>> the second--they aren't actually aliens; they're transgenics.
>>>>>>>> Monkey-
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Actually the one said they were clones from aliens... didn't play
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> second.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How much did you listen to? How much did you read? Some believed
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> they
>>>>>
>>>>> All I could get hold of...
>>>>
>>>> Hmm. If you explored everything as well... huh.
>>>
>>> I *did*.
>>
>> Um. *blinks*
>>
>> *thinks* ...wasn't it the datacube that also had the keycode for the
>> Aquinas Hub (apologies if spelling or wording is incorrect)? Do you
>> remember what was said before it--or can you reload a saved game at the
>> end,
>> and scroll back through the saved data until you find it?
>
> No, I can't.

Skahit.

<snip>
>>>> And no, no idea precisely which genes were involved, but their were
>>>> likely
>>>> to be terrestrial genes.
>>>
>>> Maybe, maybe not.
>>
>> *nods* That's all that can be certain from Deus Ex.
>>
>>>>>> there's also that computer, shortly before the part about the 'giddy
>>>>>> aquiescence'...
>>>>>
>>>>> What do you mean?
>>>>
>>>> Remember, when Dowd gives the short-speech about how things will be
>>>> like
>>>> they used to be, and Page mocks him? As you go across the room with a
>>>> computer in it, and then down a ladder? There're emails on the
>>>> computer
>>>> that I/we /think/ were relevant, though they might not say something
>>>> obvious.
>>>
>>> There were hundreds of computers and mails.
>>
>> Dozens, at least. You did read them all, though?
>
> I'm pretty sure of that.

That's good.

>>>> The main thing to read is the datacube-or-whatever, written by an
>>>> enginner
>>>> who had seen the grays and identified them to be transgenics
>>>> (presumably
>>>> originally monkeys/apes).
>>>
>>> I have a memory like a sieve, you know...
>>
>> Oh. Well, in that case see the above suggestion of reloading and
>> scrolling
>> through the stored datacube data.
>
> Reloading *what* exactly? There's nothing I could reload.

A saved game... skahit.

>>>>>>>> (ape-?)based, probably, and in particular altered to be more
>>>>>>>> resistent
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> radiation and (if I/we remember correctly) cold--Roswell, the
>>>>>>>> 'alien'-related beliefs among those without a high enough security
>>>>>>>> clearance, was just a cover-up (sorry if that's the wrong phrase).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What a shame. What I was refering to was that piece of dialogue
>>>>>>> saying
>>>>>>> the "they may be hyperintelligent aliens, but without their kind to
>>>>>>> teach them they are nothing more than bald monkeys" or something
>>>>>>> like
>>>>>>> that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *nods* Their species might have created the reactors, but they can't
>>>>>> operate them, because they're clones... an interesting concept,
>>>>>> definitely.
>>>>>> However, the person who said it didn't have a high enough security
>>>>>> clearance
>>>>>> to know the truth, and was probably allowed to believe the propagated
>>>>>> myth,
>>>>>> which... *muses irrelevantly*
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe, maybe not. After all there's often some truth in the myths and
>>>>> after all that was *in* a high clearance facility.
>>>>
>>>> True. However, the people on the surface had no idea what was going on
>>>> underground, and it's unlikely that the common engineers had any idea
>>>> what
>>>> Page was doing... remember the conversation with the MiB ordering the
>>>> engineer to remove the keypads on the small reactors, and the engineer
>>>> refusing? When the engineer refused to do it and said why (that he
>>>> thought
>>>> that they came from the aliens, and he wasn't going to risk it, to
>>>> paraphrase), the MiB said that the information was classified (...if we
>>>> remember correctly).
>>>
>>> Classified = True?
>>
>> No--just classifed. Sort of 'We refuse to either confirm or deny this'.
>
> Which is mostly said when you don't want to confirm something.

Yes. Mostly; but not always.

>>>>> Still, I tried to
>>>>> make a specific point. The influence of socialisation/education.
>>>>
>>>> Ey? Oh, yes. Abandon human children below the age of four on a
>>>> different
>>>> planet, and they wouldn't grow up building skyscrapers and railroads
>>>> and
>>>> the
>>>> like.
>>>
>>> Haha, very funny. [1]
>>
>> Erm...? We were serious. Assume that the children survived, of course.
>
> As if skyscrapers and railroads were a measure of things...

All right, human children raised by nomadic aliens on a different planet
with an inactive nuclear power plant.

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2005-03-06, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:slrnd2lf5d.e9l.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x5.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>> On 2005-03-06, bd <bdonlan@bd.beginyourfear.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>| Very true, but that brings us back to the original question: "Are norns
>>>| alive?". There must be some (psychological) test one that is clever
>>>| enough could devise. I think norns are very simple life forms, but I
>>>| don't know how to proof it :-(
>>>
>>> Any behavioral test will likely fail, as life has very varied behavior.
>>> The best way is to define life such that norns can be tested to see if
>>> they fit the criteria.
>>
>> That's of course the easiest way, but there's not much point in
>> adjusting your tests to your results. There *used* to be this definition
>> of life with reproducing and acting upon stimuli and metabolism and
>> stuff, but I'm pretty sure Norns don't fit in *there*.
>
> Don't they? Why not?

There were a few pitfalls. I thin the whole metabolism thingamajig just
couldn't be met by anything virtual...
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better...
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2005-03-06, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:slrnd2h0g9.208.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x5.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>> On 2005-03-04, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>>>>> The main thing to read is the datacube-or-whatever, written by an
>>>>> enginner
>>>>> who had seen the grays and identified them to be transgenics
>>>>> (presumably
>>>>> originally monkeys/apes).
>>>>
>>>> I have a memory like a sieve, you know...
>>>
>>> Oh. Well, in that case see the above suggestion of reloading and
>>> scrolling
>>> through the stored datacube data.
>>
>> Reloading *what* exactly? There's nothing I could reload.
>
> A saved game... skahit.

File not found.
Reason: Hard disk not found.
Reason: Computer no longer in existance.
Not in the way it used to be, at least.

>>>>>>>>> (ape-?)based, probably, and in particular altered to be more
>>>>>>>>> resistent
>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> radiation and (if I/we remember correctly) cold--Roswell, the
>>>>>>>>> 'alien'-related beliefs among those without a high enough security
>>>>>>>>> clearance, was just a cover-up (sorry if that's the wrong phrase).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What a shame. What I was refering to was that piece of dialogue
>>>>>>>> saying
>>>>>>>> the "they may be hyperintelligent aliens, but without their kind to
>>>>>>>> teach them they are nothing more than bald monkeys" or something
>>>>>>>> like
>>>>>>>> that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *nods* Their species might have created the reactors, but they can't
>>>>>>> operate them, because they're clones... an interesting concept,
>>>>>>> definitely.
>>>>>>> However, the person who said it didn't have a high enough security
>>>>>>> clearance
>>>>>>> to know the truth, and was probably allowed to believe the propagated
>>>>>>> myth,
>>>>>>> which... *muses irrelevantly*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe, maybe not. After all there's often some truth in the myths and
>>>>>> after all that was *in* a high clearance facility.
>>>>>
>>>>> True. However, the people on the surface had no idea what was going on
>>>>> underground, and it's unlikely that the common engineers had any idea
>>>>> what
>>>>> Page was doing... remember the conversation with the MiB ordering the
>>>>> engineer to remove the keypads on the small reactors, and the engineer
>>>>> refusing? When the engineer refused to do it and said why (that he
>>>>> thought
>>>>> that they came from the aliens, and he wasn't going to risk it, to
>>>>> paraphrase), the MiB said that the information was classified (...if we
>>>>> remember correctly).
>>>>
>>>> Classified = True?
>>>
>>> No--just classifed. Sort of 'We refuse to either confirm or deny this'.
>>
>> Which is mostly said when you don't want to confirm something.
>
> Yes. Mostly; but not always.

::shrugs::
Mostly is enough most of the time.

>>>>>> Still, I tried to
>>>>>> make a specific point. The influence of socialisation/education.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ey? Oh, yes. Abandon human children below the age of four on a
>>>>> different
>>>>> planet, and they wouldn't grow up building skyscrapers and railroads
>>>>> and
>>>>> the
>>>>> like.
>>>>
>>>> Haha, very funny. [1]
>>>
>>> Erm...? We were serious. Assume that the children survived, of course.
>>
>> As if skyscrapers and railroads were a measure of things...
>
> All right, human children raised by nomadic aliens on a different planet
> with an inactive nuclear power plant.

Don't go that far. Just put them into a cage. Or preferably in the
jungle.
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better...
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2005-03-06, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:slrnd2h0ai.208.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x5.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>>>> And I'm not going to do anything to do with abstract
>>>> mathematics (wait a sec - it can be non-abstract?) if I don't have to.
>>>
>>> True, but if you wanted to, you /could/. A plant can neither want nor
>>> do.
>>
>> No, I don't think I really can. It's just too... abstract, I think. Most
>> of the time anyway.
>
> ...well, gah.
>
> All right, we eventually want Norns that can think at or above /our/ level.
> Actually, how did this part of the conversation start? *just got back from
> Lancaster*

I have no idea. I think somebody was foolish enough to excuse for
proposing JAVA.

>>> And there's applied mathematics--physics, engineering, bus timetables,
>>> etc.
>>> It's very important.
>>
>> Physics isn't applied mathematics. Neither is engineering. Not only.
>
> True, but applied mathematics is used in physics-related equations. Same
> with engineering.

Oh, give me a break. I have a pretty good idea what maths mean in
physics.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Intelligence is a matter of definition, of course.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *nods...* And (we think) irrelevant to the status of being
>>>>>>>>>>>>> alive.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, you'd probably call anything intelligent "alive".
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Eh. Not necessarily--what about a stereotypical AI, such as
>>>>>>>>>>> SHODAN?
>>>>>>>>>>> It
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You mean the typical AI with a god complex?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Well, that too. The god complex is optional--for another example,
>>>>>>>>> take
>>>>>>>>> Halo's Cortana, though arguably as she semi-originated from a
>>>>>>>>> living
>>>>>>>>> human,
>>>>>>>>> she doesn't count as much.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Didn't play Halo.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pity. Ah, well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Xbox, wasn't it?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, but it was recently released for the PC, and is very good. *nod
>>>>> nod*
>>>>
>>>> ::shrugs:: I don't really care.
>>>
>>> Aiee.
>>
>> Huh?
>
> (Must... make a gamer... out of emmel...!)

Forget it. I'm to old for that now. Ther are more important things.

>>>>>>>>>>> can't breathe, eat, reproduce, and Darwinian evolution certainly
>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't
>>>>>>>>>>> apply to it... intelligence, but death-based, rather than
>>>>>>>>>>> life-based.
>>>>>>>>>>> Or
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It's fiction.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So? There's nothing theoretical (so far) that says that it's
>>>>>>>>> impossible,
>>>>>>>>> and often science fiction predicts actual events long before they
>>>>>>>>> happen
>>>>>>>>> (submarines? Men on the moon?).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> SDI?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ...what?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Google for it. Has something to do with "Project StarWars".
>>>>>
>>>>> Er... how nice. *thinks* Wasn't that the one about shooting missiles
>>>>> before they hit?
>>>>>
>>>>> (Scuba Diving International?)
>>>>
>>>> Strategic Defense Initiative.
>>>
>>> Ohh. What science fiction predicted it?
>>
>> Deparment of Defence press releases, I think.
>
> Figures. How much did it (the science fiction) sell for?

Hm... several milliards I think.

>>>>>>>> Come on, you can't take everything for real. Some things are
>>>>>>>> fiction and not more.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> True. But some day...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Look, the limits are given by the laws of nature. Even "some day" you
>>>>>> won't be able to build a perpetuum mobile, for example.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, yes. But there aren't currently any such laws known which would
>>>>> prevent a computer-based intelligence from existing.
>>>>
>>>> I didn't say there were.
>>>
>>> Ah. Please explain what exactly you /did/ say/mean to say, then.
>>
>> You can't expect any scienxe fiction to turn up in reality. There are
>> things that just aren't going to work.
>
> Well, of course. But there's also science fiction which looks as if it /is/
> going to work, if we have time to implement it.

Sometimes. But that has nothing to to with what is really going to work.
I'm pretty sure Jule Verne's Nautilus didn't sound very likely back
then...

> Also, a thought on intelligence and/or neural networks: curiosity is very
> important. Think about that for a few seconds.

Point.

>>>>>> And
>>>>>> remember, Diego was still around then.
>>>>>
>>>>> /And/ trying to hide from SHODAN, and then later betraying the other
>>>>> humans
>>>>> and becoming SHODAN's pawn in exchange for his life (and, granted,
>>>>> various
>>>>> cyborgly abilities).
>>>>
>>>> Well, it just did what it was told to. Obviously someone did a mistake
>>>> stating what that was, but still.
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>> Play... the game... again. How long has it been since you last did so?
>>> You seem to have forgotten a lot.
>>
>> Hm... decade?
>
> Dear Sidhe.

Have you looked at the calendar lately? It's 2005 already.

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not certain we agree about the highlander part (though we're
>>>>>>>>>>>>> also
>>>>>>>>>>>>> against
>>>>>>>>>>>>> it, for possibly slightly different reasons), but the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> hardcoding
>>>>>>>>>>>>> part...
>>>>>>>>>>>>> yes. It's the hardcoding that we feel holds norns back from
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'life'
>>>>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and the other organisms on and in the Earth know/experience it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The question is in how far we are hardcoded.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Seeing as we evolved from single-celled organisms, I'd/we'd say
>>>>>>>>>>> almost
>>>>>>>>>>> certainly not at all. Any 'hardcoding' is due to our genes,
>>>>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>>> by
>>>>>>>>>>> no
>>>>>>>>>>> means themselves hardcoded in that regard.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The chamical reactions in our body are pretty much hard coded...
>>>>>>>>>> by
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> natural laws. It all depends.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yes. However, the /living/ part... the part that existed within
>>>>>>>>> those
>>>>>>>>> rules, adapting to them and around them...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A similar parallel with norns could exist--/should/ exist, as
>>>>>>>>> they're
>>>>>>>>> unhindered by natural laws, which results in cases like the
>>>>>>>>> Highlander
>>>>>>>>> norns
>>>>>>>>> and the like.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They have other limits, though.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /Exactly/. The mental hardcoding, for example, which under Albian
>>>>>>> natural
>>>>>>> laws /cannot/ be broken, /cannot/ be changed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thus, the desire to free their minds.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The question is what restrainst are *necessary* and which are
>>>>>> *limiting*.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the short term, try to more-or-less model terrestrial life, as the
>>>>> only
>>>>> examples of life that we have. Then, start looking at things and
>>>>> asking
>>>>> 'Is
>>>>
>>>> That's the mistake. You can't take one example and say that's the
>>>> measure of all things.
>>>
>>> Oh, it's not--but it's a starting point, at least. Can we hope to create
>>> a
>>> completely different life form, unrelated in every respect to humanity?
>>> Maybe not, using said examples. But at least we can try to make
>>> something
>>> to /equal/--maybe even surpass--humanity, and then /later/ start looking
>>> at
>>> alternatives.
>>
>> And I still think that's starting at the wrong end, but that's just me.
>
> Hmm. Starting at the other end is also reasonable, to an extent. *nods*

::shrugs::
It's a POV thing.

>>>>> this necessary? What would be the concequences of removing it, or
>>>>> changing
>>>>> it?'. In a way, we could play the Sidhe. *grins*
>>>>
>>>> We already are doing that.
>>>
>>> Heh... yes. It's nice to think about it, though--and of doing it
>>> /personally/, instead of simply stating opinions, ideas, typing and
>>> longing
>>> to interfere directly.
>>
>> Erm, what?
>
> Feel free to elaborate.

Huh?
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better...
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

emmel wrote:

<snip>

> File not found.
> Reason: Hard disk not found.
> Reason: Computer no longer in existance.
> Not in the way it used to be, at least.

You probably already heard this one, but hey:
"Who is general Failure. And why is he reading my hard drive?"

fun,
Thomas
- --
"All my life, I've always wondered, What it would be like to fire a
ballistic missile" - Wonderfully colored plastic war toys, The Dead
Milkmen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQB5AwUBQitNtgEP2l8iXKAJAQHmuQMdHAIkMDZzAFsqeBYcszRw5/ubAt4O5cET
Lco+27UGDC64N1BGJ9e8cXsJgSC4ooUoW8eKkjn3d3Zky+v+t7gjEbcB8Y/lr3mv
VgpeMg38IINjf6eDIk56FTF+KkoAwYmCdYt4mw==
=Jg00
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

emmel wrote:
> On 2005-03-06, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>
>>"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
>>news:slrnd2h0ai.208.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x5.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...

<snip>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Intelligence is a matter of definition, of course.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*nods...* And (we think) irrelevant to the status of being
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>alive.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Yes, you'd probably call anything intelligent "alive".
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>Eh. Not necessarily--what about a stereotypical AI, such as
>>>>>>>>>>>>SHODAN?
>>>>>>>>>>>>It
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>You mean the typical AI with a god complex?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Well, that too. The god complex is optional--for another example,
>>>>>>>>>>take
>>>>>>>>>>Halo's Cortana, though arguably as she semi-originated from a
>>>>>>>>>>living
>>>>>>>>>>human,
>>>>>>>>>>she doesn't count as much.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Didn't play Halo.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Pity. Ah, well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Xbox, wasn't it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Yes, but it was recently released for the PC, and is very good. *nod
>>>>>>nod*
>>>>>
>>>>>::shrugs:: I don't really care.
>>>>
>>>>Aiee.
>>>
>>>Huh?
>>
>>(Must... make a gamer... out of emmel...!)
>
>
> Forget it. I'm to old for that now. Ther are more important things.

More important?! Remember, "You're In the game" and "Life is like a
videogame with no chance to win". (took that from the lyrics of "Delete
Yourself" by "Atari Teenage Riot" or ATR for short; you could probably
find it on some p2p network if you tried hard enough, tis godo).

Thomas
- --
"All my life, I've always wondered, What it would be like to fire a
ballistic missile" - Wonderfully colored plastic war toys, The Dead
Milkmen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQB5AwUBQitOfQEP2l8iXKAJAQFy/gMeK77i+WfvftBlJDU9tiwsv0Cz3EeHKJEf
CuTdqZmvTEwu1LBA2CymATHZ991AdkzFZRa9F/i2yCppywIMULAf+/0pu+pB0kYG
fWCBY+D1WoTPgec3WDqdv9utImfkOijBS1UzVw==
=wYDR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2005-03-06, Thomas J. Boschloo <nospam@hccnet.nl.invalid> wrote:
>
> emmel wrote:
>> On 2005-03-06, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>>
>>>"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
>>>news:slrnd2h0ai.208.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x5.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>
><snip>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Intelligence is a matter of definition, of course.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*nods...* And (we think) irrelevant to the status of being
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>alive.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Yes, you'd probably call anything intelligent "alive".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Eh. Not necessarily--what about a stereotypical AI, such as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>SHODAN?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>It
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>You mean the typical AI with a god complex?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Well, that too. The god complex is optional--for another example,
>>>>>>>>>>>take
>>>>>>>>>>>Halo's Cortana, though arguably as she semi-originated from a
>>>>>>>>>>>living
>>>>>>>>>>>human,
>>>>>>>>>>>she doesn't count as much.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Didn't play Halo.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Pity. Ah, well.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Xbox, wasn't it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Yes, but it was recently released for the PC, and is very good. *nod
>>>>>>>nod*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>::shrugs:: I don't really care.
>>>>>
>>>>>Aiee.
>>>>
>>>>Huh?
>>>
>>>(Must... make a gamer... out of emmel...!)
>>
>>
>> Forget it. I'm to old for that now. Ther are more important things.
>
> More important?! Remember, "You're In the game" and "Life is like a
> videogame with no chance to win". (took that from the lyrics of "Delete
> Yourself" by "Atari Teenage Riot" or ATR for short; you could probably
> find it on some p2p network if you tried hard enough, tis godo).

And I'm about to loose.
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better...
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:slrnd2mfq1.h6j.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x3.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> On 2005-03-06, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
>> news:slrnd2lf5d.e9l.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x5.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>>> On 2005-03-06, bd <bdonlan@bd.beginyourfear.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>| Very true, but that brings us back to the original question: "Are
>>>>norns
>>>>| alive?". There must be some (psychological) test one that is clever
>>>>| enough could devise. I think norns are very simple life forms, but I
>>>>| don't know how to proof it :-(
>>>>
>>>> Any behavioral test will likely fail, as life has very varied behavior.
>>>> The best way is to define life such that norns can be tested to see if
>>>> they fit the criteria.
>>>
>>> That's of course the easiest way, but there's not much point in
>>> adjusting your tests to your results. There *used* to be this definition
>>> of life with reproducing and acting upon stimuli and metabolism and
>>> stuff, but I'm pretty sure Norns don't fit in *there*.
>>
>> Don't they? Why not?
>
> There were a few pitfalls. I thin the whole metabolism thingamajig just
> couldn't be met by anything virtual...

Hmm. Strange... they at least gave a good impression of simulating it, at
least in C2.

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:slrnd2mgd9.h6j.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x3.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> On 2005-03-06, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
>> news:slrnd2h0ai.208.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x5.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>>>>> And I'm not going to do anything to do with abstract
>>>>> mathematics (wait a sec - it can be non-abstract?) if I don't have to.
>>>>
>>>> True, but if you wanted to, you /could/. A plant can neither want nor
>>>> do.
>>>
>>> No, I don't think I really can. It's just too... abstract, I think. Most
>>> of the time anyway.
>>
>> ...well, gah.
>>
>> All right, we eventually want Norns that can think at or above /our/
>> level.
>> Actually, how did this part of the conversation start? *just got back
>> from
>> Lancaster*
>
> I have no idea. I think somebody was foolish enough to excuse for
> proposing JAVA.

Um. Strange. *craves a pear, and is/are extremely irritable from having
been offered a pear right after the period when a pear /could/ have been
eaten and appreciated had just skahing /ENDED/*

>>>> And there's applied mathematics--physics, engineering, bus timetables,
>>>> etc.
>>>> It's very important.
>>>
>>> Physics isn't applied mathematics. Neither is engineering. Not only.
>>
>> True, but applied mathematics is used in physics-related equations. Same
>> with engineering.
>
> Oh, give me a break. I have a pretty good idea what maths mean in
> physics.

Ah. Why did you ask, then?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Intelligence is a matter of definition, of course.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *nods...* And (we think) irrelevant to the status of being
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> alive.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, you'd probably call anything intelligent "alive".
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Eh. Not necessarily--what about a stereotypical AI, such as
>>>>>>>>>>>> SHODAN?
>>>>>>>>>>>> It
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> You mean the typical AI with a god complex?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Well, that too. The god complex is optional--for another
>>>>>>>>>> example,
>>>>>>>>>> take
>>>>>>>>>> Halo's Cortana, though arguably as she semi-originated from a
>>>>>>>>>> living
>>>>>>>>>> human,
>>>>>>>>>> she doesn't count as much.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Didn't play Halo.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Pity. Ah, well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Xbox, wasn't it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, but it was recently released for the PC, and is very good. *nod
>>>>>> nod*
>>>>>
>>>>> ::shrugs:: I don't really care.
>>>>
>>>> Aiee.
>>>
>>> Huh?
>>
>> (Must... make a gamer... out of emmel...!)
>
> Forget it. I'm to old for that now. Ther are more important things.

Hm. Such as AL/AI?

>>>>>>>>>>>> can't breathe, eat, reproduce, and Darwinian evolution
>>>>>>>>>>>> certainly
>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't
>>>>>>>>>>>> apply to it... intelligence, but death-based, rather than
>>>>>>>>>>>> life-based.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Or
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It's fiction.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So? There's nothing theoretical (so far) that says that it's
>>>>>>>>>> impossible,
>>>>>>>>>> and often science fiction predicts actual events long before they
>>>>>>>>>> happen
>>>>>>>>>> (submarines? Men on the moon?).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> SDI?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ...what?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Google for it. Has something to do with "Project StarWars".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Er... how nice. *thinks* Wasn't that the one about shooting
>>>>>> missiles
>>>>>> before they hit?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (Scuba Diving International?)
>>>>>
>>>>> Strategic Defense Initiative.
>>>>
>>>> Ohh. What science fiction predicted it?
>>>
>>> Deparment of Defence press releases, I think.
>>
>> Figures. How much did it (the science fiction) sell for?
>
> Hm... several milliards I think.

Which is how much in pounds?

>>>>>>>>> Come on, you can't take everything for real. Some things are
>>>>>>>>> fiction and not more.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> True. But some day...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Look, the limits are given by the laws of nature. Even "some day"
>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>> won't be able to build a perpetuum mobile, for example.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, yes. But there aren't currently any such laws known which
>>>>>> would
>>>>>> prevent a computer-based intelligence from existing.
>>>>>
>>>>> I didn't say there were.
>>>>
>>>> Ah. Please explain what exactly you /did/ say/mean to say, then.
>>>
>>> You can't expect any scienxe fiction to turn up in reality. There are
>>> things that just aren't going to work.
>>
>> Well, of course. But there's also science fiction which looks as if it
>> /is/
>> going to work, if we have time to implement it.
>
> Sometimes. But that has nothing to to with what is really going to work.

Which is why we have to find out whether it will or not.

> I'm pretty sure Jule Verne's Nautilus didn't sound very likely back
> then...

What? And as a note, intelligences on the lines of SHODAN actually /do/
sound reasonably likely.

>> Also, a thought on intelligence and/or neural networks: curiosity is
>> very
>> important. Think about that for a few seconds.
>
> Point.
>
>>>>>>> And
>>>>>>> remember, Diego was still around then.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /And/ trying to hide from SHODAN, and then later betraying the other
>>>>>> humans
>>>>>> and becoming SHODAN's pawn in exchange for his life (and, granted,
>>>>>> various
>>>>>> cyborgly abilities).
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, it just did what it was told to. Obviously someone did a mistake
>>>>> stating what that was, but still.
>>>>
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> Play... the game... again. How long has it been since you last did
>>>> so?
>>>> You seem to have forgotten a lot.
>>>
>>> Hm... decade?
>>
>> Dear Sidhe.
>
> Have you looked at the calendar lately? It's 2005 already.

Startling. In any case, you need to play it again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not certain we agree about the highlander part (though we're
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> against
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it, for possibly slightly different reasons), but the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hardcoding
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> part...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yes. It's the hardcoding that we feel holds norns back from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'life'
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and the other organisms on and in the Earth know/experience
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The question is in how far we are hardcoded.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Seeing as we evolved from single-celled organisms, I'd/we'd say
>>>>>>>>>>>> almost
>>>>>>>>>>>> certainly not at all. Any 'hardcoding' is due to our genes,
>>>>>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>>>> by
>>>>>>>>>>>> no
>>>>>>>>>>>> means themselves hardcoded in that regard.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The chamical reactions in our body are pretty much hard coded...
>>>>>>>>>>> by
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> natural laws. It all depends.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yes. However, the /living/ part... the part that existed within
>>>>>>>>>> those
>>>>>>>>>> rules, adapting to them and around them...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> A similar parallel with norns could exist--/should/ exist, as
>>>>>>>>>> they're
>>>>>>>>>> unhindered by natural laws, which results in cases like the
>>>>>>>>>> Highlander
>>>>>>>>>> norns
>>>>>>>>>> and the like.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> They have other limits, though.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> /Exactly/. The mental hardcoding, for example, which under Albian
>>>>>>>> natural
>>>>>>>> laws /cannot/ be broken, /cannot/ be changed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thus, the desire to free their minds.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The question is what restrainst are *necessary* and which are
>>>>>>> *limiting*.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the short term, try to more-or-less model terrestrial life, as the
>>>>>> only
>>>>>> examples of life that we have. Then, start looking at things and
>>>>>> asking
>>>>>> 'Is
>>>>>
>>>>> That's the mistake. You can't take one example and say that's the
>>>>> measure of all things.
>>>>
>>>> Oh, it's not--but it's a starting point, at least. Can we hope to
>>>> create
>>>> a
>>>> completely different life form, unrelated in every respect to humanity?
>>>> Maybe not, using said examples. But at least we can try to make
>>>> something
>>>> to /equal/--maybe even surpass--humanity, and then /later/ start
>>>> looking
>>>> at
>>>> alternatives.
>>>
>>> And I still think that's starting at the wrong end, but that's just me.
>>
>> Hmm. Starting at the other end is also reasonable, to an extent. *nods*
>
> ::shrugs::
> It's a POV thing.

Likely.

>>>>>> this necessary? What would be the concequences of removing it, or
>>>>>> changing
>>>>>> it?'. In a way, we could play the Sidhe. *grins*
>>>>>
>>>>> We already are doing that.
>>>>
>>>> Heh... yes. It's nice to think about it, though--and of doing it
>>>> /personally/, instead of simply stating opinions, ideas, typing and
>>>> longing
>>>> to interfere directly.
>>>
>>> Erm, what?
>>
>> Feel free to elaborate.
>
> Huh?

What are you asking?

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:slrnd2ns24.h6q.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x4.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> On 2005-03-06, Thomas J. Boschloo <nospam@hccnet.nl.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> emmel wrote:
>>> On 2005-03-06, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>>>
>>>>"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:slrnd2h0ai.208.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x5.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Intelligence is a matter of definition, of course.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*nods...* And (we think) irrelevant to the status of being
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>alive.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Yes, you'd probably call anything intelligent "alive".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Eh. Not necessarily--what about a stereotypical AI, such as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>SHODAN?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>You mean the typical AI with a god complex?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>Well, that too. The god complex is optional--for another
>>>>>>>>>>>>example,
>>>>>>>>>>>>take
>>>>>>>>>>>>Halo's Cortana, though arguably as she semi-originated from a
>>>>>>>>>>>>living
>>>>>>>>>>>>human,
>>>>>>>>>>>>she doesn't count as much.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Didn't play Halo.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Pity. Ah, well.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Xbox, wasn't it?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Yes, but it was recently released for the PC, and is very good.
>>>>>>>>*nod
>>>>>>>>nod*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>::shrugs:: I don't really care.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Aiee.
>>>>>
>>>>>Huh?
>>>>
>>>>(Must... make a gamer... out of emmel...!)
>>>
>>>
>>> Forget it. I'm to old for that now. Ther are more important things.
>>
>> More important?! Remember, "You're In the game" and "Life is like a
>> videogame with no chance to win". (took that from the lyrics of "Delete
>> Yourself" by "Atari Teenage Riot" or ATR for short; you could probably
>> find it on some p2p network if you tried hard enough, tis godo).
>
> And I'm about to loose.

....
'lose'. One 'o'.

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

"Thomas J. Boschloo" <nospam@hccnet.nl.invalid> wrote in message
news:422b4efe$0$774$3a628fcd@reader10.nntp.hccnet.nl...
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> emmel wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> File not found.
>> Reason: Hard disk not found.
>> Reason: Computer no longer in existance.
>> Not in the way it used to be, at least.
>
> You probably already heard this one, but hey:
> "Who is general Failure. And why is he reading my hard drive?"

....and remember Colonel Panic...

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:slrnd2mg0d.h6j.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x3.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> On 2005-03-06, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
>> news:slrnd2h0g9.208.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x5.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>>> On 2005-03-04, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>>>>>> The main thing to read is the datacube-or-whatever, written by an
>>>>>> enginner
>>>>>> who had seen the grays and identified them to be transgenics
>>>>>> (presumably
>>>>>> originally monkeys/apes).
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a memory like a sieve, you know...
>>>>
>>>> Oh. Well, in that case see the above suggestion of reloading and
>>>> scrolling
>>>> through the stored datacube data.
>>>
>>> Reloading *what* exactly? There's nothing I could reload.
>>
>> A saved game... skahit.
>
> File not found.
> Reason: Hard disk not found.
> Reason: Computer no longer in existance.
> Not in the way it used to be, at least.

Gah.

>>>>>>>>>> (ape-?)based, probably, and in particular altered to be more
>>>>>>>>>> resistent
>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> radiation and (if I/we remember correctly) cold--Roswell, the
>>>>>>>>>> 'alien'-related beliefs among those without a high enough
>>>>>>>>>> security
>>>>>>>>>> clearance, was just a cover-up (sorry if that's the wrong
>>>>>>>>>> phrase).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What a shame. What I was refering to was that piece of dialogue
>>>>>>>>> saying
>>>>>>>>> the "they may be hyperintelligent aliens, but without their kind
>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> teach them they are nothing more than bald monkeys" or something
>>>>>>>>> like
>>>>>>>>> that.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *nods* Their species might have created the reactors, but they
>>>>>>>> can't
>>>>>>>> operate them, because they're clones... an interesting concept,
>>>>>>>> definitely.
>>>>>>>> However, the person who said it didn't have a high enough security
>>>>>>>> clearance
>>>>>>>> to know the truth, and was probably allowed to believe the
>>>>>>>> propagated
>>>>>>>> myth,
>>>>>>>> which... *muses irrelevantly*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Maybe, maybe not. After all there's often some truth in the myths
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> after all that was *in* a high clearance facility.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> True. However, the people on the surface had no idea what was going
>>>>>> on
>>>>>> underground, and it's unlikely that the common engineers had any idea
>>>>>> what
>>>>>> Page was doing... remember the conversation with the MiB ordering
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> engineer to remove the keypads on the small reactors, and the
>>>>>> engineer
>>>>>> refusing? When the engineer refused to do it and said why (that he
>>>>>> thought
>>>>>> that they came from the aliens, and he wasn't going to risk it, to
>>>>>> paraphrase), the MiB said that the information was classified (...if
>>>>>> we
>>>>>> remember correctly).
>>>>>
>>>>> Classified = True?
>>>>
>>>> No--just classifed. Sort of 'We refuse to either confirm or deny
>>>> this'.
>>>
>>> Which is mostly said when you don't want to confirm something.
>>
>> Yes. Mostly; but not always.
>
> ::shrugs::
> Mostly is enough most of the time.

Yes. /Most/ of the time.

>>>>>>> Still, I tried to
>>>>>>> make a specific point. The influence of socialisation/education.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ey? Oh, yes. Abandon human children below the age of four on a
>>>>>> different
>>>>>> planet, and they wouldn't grow up building skyscrapers and railroads
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> like.
>>>>>
>>>>> Haha, very funny. [1]
>>>>
>>>> Erm...? We were serious. Assume that the children survived, of
>>>> course.
>>>
>>> As if skyscrapers and railroads were a measure of things...
>>
>> All right, human children raised by nomadic aliens on a different planet
>> with an inactive nuclear power plant.
>
> Don't go that far. Just put them into a cage. Or preferably in the
> jungle.

I think we're working towards different goals.

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2005-03-07, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:slrnd2mfq1.h6j.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x3.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>> On 2005-03-06, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>>> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
>>> news:slrnd2lf5d.e9l.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x5.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>>>> On 2005-03-06, bd <bdonlan@bd.beginyourfear.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>| Very true, but that brings us back to the original question: "Are
>>>>>norns
>>>>>| alive?". There must be some (psychological) test one that is clever
>>>>>| enough could devise. I think norns are very simple life forms, but I
>>>>>| don't know how to proof it :-(
>>>>>
>>>>> Any behavioral test will likely fail, as life has very varied behavior.
>>>>> The best way is to define life such that norns can be tested to see if
>>>>> they fit the criteria.
>>>>
>>>> That's of course the easiest way, but there's not much point in
>>>> adjusting your tests to your results. There *used* to be this definition
>>>> of life with reproducing and acting upon stimuli and metabolism and
>>>> stuff, but I'm pretty sure Norns don't fit in *there*.
>>>
>>> Don't they? Why not?
>>
>> There were a few pitfalls. I thin the whole metabolism thingamajig just
>> couldn't be met by anything virtual...
>
> Hmm. Strange... they at least gave a good impression of simulating it, at
> least in C2.

Yes, but the definiton was rather strict.
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better...
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2005-03-07, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:slrnd2mg0d.h6j.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x3.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>>>>>>> Ey? Oh, yes. Abandon human children below the age of four on a
>>>>>>> different
>>>>>>> planet, and they wouldn't grow up building skyscrapers and railroads
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> like.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Haha, very funny. [1]
>>>>>
>>>>> Erm...? We were serious. Assume that the children survived, of
>>>>> course.
>>>>
>>>> As if skyscrapers and railroads were a measure of things...
>>>
>>> All right, human children raised by nomadic aliens on a different planet
>>> with an inactive nuclear power plant.
>>
>> Don't go that far. Just put them into a cage. Or preferably in the
>> jungle.
>
> I think we're working towards different goals.

Goals? Wait... you are *not* experimenting on humans, are you? Keep
_that_ for the professionals, will you?
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better...
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2005-03-07, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:slrnd2ns24.h6q.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x4.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>> On 2005-03-06, Thomas J. Boschloo <nospam@hccnet.nl.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> emmel wrote:
>>>> On 2005-03-06, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
>>>>>news:slrnd2h0ai.208.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x5.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>>>
>>><snip>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Intelligence is a matter of definition, of course.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*nods...* And (we think) irrelevant to the status of being
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>alive.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Yes, you'd probably call anything intelligent "alive".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Eh. Not necessarily--what about a stereotypical AI, such as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>SHODAN?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You mean the typical AI with a god complex?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Well, that too. The god complex is optional--for another
>>>>>>>>>>>>>example,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>take
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Halo's Cortana, though arguably as she semi-originated from a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>living
>>>>>>>>>>>>>human,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>she doesn't count as much.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>Didn't play Halo.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Pity. Ah, well.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Xbox, wasn't it?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Yes, but it was recently released for the PC, and is very good.
>>>>>>>>>*nod
>>>>>>>>>nod*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>::shrugs:: I don't really care.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Aiee.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Huh?
>>>>>
>>>>>(Must... make a gamer... out of emmel...!)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Forget it. I'm to old for that now. Ther are more important things.
>>>
>>> More important?! Remember, "You're In the game" and "Life is like a
>>> videogame with no chance to win". (took that from the lyrics of "Delete
>>> Yourself" by "Atari Teenage Riot" or ATR for short; you could probably
>>> find it on some p2p network if you tried hard enough, tis godo).
>>
>> And I'm about to loose.
>
> ...
> 'lose'. One 'o'.

Well, my mind is loosening/loosing(sp?) any links to that way of
thinking...
(I know, lousy excuse.)
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better...
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2005-03-07, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:slrnd2mgd9.h6j.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x3.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>> On 2005-03-06, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>>> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
>>> news:slrnd2h0ai.208.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x5.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>>>>>> And I'm not going to do anything to do with abstract
>>>>>> mathematics (wait a sec - it can be non-abstract?) if I don't have to.
>>>>>
>>>>> True, but if you wanted to, you /could/. A plant can neither want nor
>>>>> do.
>>>>
>>>> No, I don't think I really can. It's just too... abstract, I think. Most
>>>> of the time anyway.
>>>
>>> ...well, gah.
>>>
>>> All right, we eventually want Norns that can think at or above /our/
>>> level.
>>> Actually, how did this part of the conversation start? *just got back
>>> from
>>> Lancaster*
>>
>> I have no idea. I think somebody was foolish enough to excuse for
>> proposing JAVA.
>
> Um. Strange. *craves a pear, and is/are extremely irritable from having
> been offered a pear right after the period when a pear /could/ have been
> eaten and appreciated had just skahing /ENDED/*

And I thought I had problems.

>>>>> And there's applied mathematics--physics, engineering, bus timetables,
>>>>> etc.
>>>>> It's very important.
>>>>
>>>> Physics isn't applied mathematics. Neither is engineering. Not only.
>>>
>>> True, but applied mathematics is used in physics-related equations. Same
>>> with engineering.
>>
>> Oh, give me a break. I have a pretty good idea what maths mean in
>> physics.
>
> Ah. Why did you ask, then?

I'm pretty sure whatever I asked was rethorical...

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Intelligence is a matter of definition, of course.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *nods...* And (we think) irrelevant to the status of being
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> alive.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, you'd probably call anything intelligent "alive".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eh. Not necessarily--what about a stereotypical AI, such as
>>>>>>>>>>>>> SHODAN?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> You mean the typical AI with a god complex?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Well, that too. The god complex is optional--for another
>>>>>>>>>>> example,
>>>>>>>>>>> take
>>>>>>>>>>> Halo's Cortana, though arguably as she semi-originated from a
>>>>>>>>>>> living
>>>>>>>>>>> human,
>>>>>>>>>>> she doesn't count as much.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Didn't play Halo.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Pity. Ah, well.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Xbox, wasn't it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, but it was recently released for the PC, and is very good. *nod
>>>>>>> nod*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ::shrugs:: I don't really care.
>>>>>
>>>>> Aiee.
>>>>
>>>> Huh?
>>>
>>> (Must... make a gamer... out of emmel...!)
>>
>> Forget it. I'm to old for that now. Ther are more important things.
>
> Hm. Such as AL/AI?

More like UNI.

>>>>>>>>>>>>> can't breathe, eat, reproduce, and Darwinian evolution
>>>>>>>>>>>>> certainly
>>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't
>>>>>>>>>>>>> apply to it... intelligence, but death-based, rather than
>>>>>>>>>>>>> life-based.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Or
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> It's fiction.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So? There's nothing theoretical (so far) that says that it's
>>>>>>>>>>> impossible,
>>>>>>>>>>> and often science fiction predicts actual events long before they
>>>>>>>>>>> happen
>>>>>>>>>>> (submarines? Men on the moon?).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> SDI?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ...what?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Google for it. Has something to do with "Project StarWars".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Er... how nice. *thinks* Wasn't that the one about shooting
>>>>>>> missiles
>>>>>>> before they hit?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (Scuba Diving International?)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Strategic Defense Initiative.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ohh. What science fiction predicted it?
>>>>
>>>> Deparment of Defence press releases, I think.
>>>
>>> Figures. How much did it (the science fiction) sell for?
>>
>> Hm... several milliards I think.
>
> Which is how much in pounds?

Several milliards, I think.

>> I'm pretty sure Jule Verne's Nautilus didn't sound very likely back
>> then...
>
> What? And as a note, intelligences on the lines of SHODAN actually /do/
> sound reasonably likely.

I must be living in another dimension...

>>>>>>>> And
>>>>>>>> remember, Diego was still around then.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /And/ trying to hide from SHODAN, and then later betraying the other
>>>>>>> humans
>>>>>>> and becoming SHODAN's pawn in exchange for his life (and, granted,
>>>>>>> various
>>>>>>> cyborgly abilities).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, it just did what it was told to. Obviously someone did a mistake
>>>>>> stating what that was, but still.
>>>>>
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>> Play... the game... again. How long has it been since you last did
>>>>> so?
>>>>> You seem to have forgotten a lot.
>>>>
>>>> Hm... decade?
>>>
>>> Dear Sidhe.
>>
>> Have you looked at the calendar lately? It's 2005 already.
>
> Startling. In any case, you need to play it again.

For heavebs sake, I don't even know if I have any hardware that could
run it.

>>>>>>> this necessary? What would be the concequences of removing it, or
>>>>>>> changing
>>>>>>> it?'. In a way, we could play the Sidhe. *grins*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We already are doing that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Heh... yes. It's nice to think about it, though--and of doing it
>>>>> /personally/, instead of simply stating opinions, ideas, typing and
>>>>> longing
>>>>> to interfere directly.
>>>>
>>>> Erm, what?
>>>
>>> Feel free to elaborate.
>>
>> Huh?
>
> What are you asking?

'Erm, what?' like in 'What do you try to say?'.
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better...
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:slrnd2qphm.vgk.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x10.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> On 2005-03-07, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
>> news:slrnd2mfq1.h6j.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x3.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>>> On 2005-03-06, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>>>> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:slrnd2lf5d.e9l.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x5.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>>>>> On 2005-03-06, bd <bdonlan@bd.beginyourfear.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>| Very true, but that brings us back to the original question: "Are
>>>>>>norns
>>>>>>| alive?". There must be some (psychological) test one that is clever
>>>>>>| enough could devise. I think norns are very simple life forms, but I
>>>>>>| don't know how to proof it :-(
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any behavioral test will likely fail, as life has very varied
>>>>>> behavior.
>>>>>> The best way is to define life such that norns can be tested to see
>>>>>> if
>>>>>> they fit the criteria.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's of course the easiest way, but there's not much point in
>>>>> adjusting your tests to your results. There *used* to be this
>>>>> definition
>>>>> of life with reproducing and acting upon stimuli and metabolism and
>>>>> stuff, but I'm pretty sure Norns don't fit in *there*.
>>>>
>>>> Don't they? Why not?
>>>
>>> There were a few pitfalls. I thin the whole metabolism thingamajig just
>>> couldn't be met by anything virtual...
>>
>> Hmm. Strange... they at least gave a good impression of simulating it,
>> at
>> least in C2.
>
> Yes, but the definiton was rather strict.

Ah. What were the relevant parts?

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:slrnd2qpoj.vgk.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x10.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> On 2005-03-07, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
>> news:slrnd2ns24.h6q.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x4.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>>> On 2005-03-06, Thomas J. Boschloo <nospam@hccnet.nl.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> emmel wrote:
>>>>> On 2005-03-06, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:slrnd2h0ai.208.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x5.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>>>>
>>>><snip>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Intelligence is a matter of definition, of course.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*nods...* And (we think) irrelevant to the status of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>being
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>alive.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Yes, you'd probably call anything intelligent "alive".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Eh. Not necessarily--what about a stereotypical AI, such as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>SHODAN?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You mean the typical AI with a god complex?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Well, that too. The god complex is optional--for another
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>example,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>take
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Halo's Cortana, though arguably as she semi-originated from a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>living
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>human,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>she doesn't count as much.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Didn't play Halo.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>Pity. Ah, well.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Xbox, wasn't it?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Yes, but it was recently released for the PC, and is very good.
>>>>>>>>>>*nod
>>>>>>>>>>nod*
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>::shrugs:: I don't really care.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Aiee.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Huh?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>(Must... make a gamer... out of emmel...!)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Forget it. I'm to old for that now. Ther are more important things.
>>>>
>>>> More important?! Remember, "You're In the game" and "Life is like a
>>>> videogame with no chance to win". (took that from the lyrics of "Delete
>>>> Yourself" by "Atari Teenage Riot" or ATR for short; you could probably
>>>> find it on some p2p network if you tried hard enough, tis godo).
>>>
>>> And I'm about to loose.
>>
>> ...
>> 'lose'. One 'o'.
>
> Well, my mind is loosening/loosing(sp?) any links to that way of
> thinking...
> (I know, lousy excuse.)

Thingamajig. And 'losing'.

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:slrnd2qq12.vgk.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x10.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> On 2005-03-07, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
>> news:slrnd2mgd9.h6j.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x3.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>>> On 2005-03-06, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>>>> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:slrnd2h0ai.208.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x5.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>>>>>>> And I'm not going to do anything to do with abstract
>>>>>>> mathematics (wait a sec - it can be non-abstract?) if I don't have
>>>>>>> to.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> True, but if you wanted to, you /could/. A plant can neither want
>>>>>> nor
>>>>>> do.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, I don't think I really can. It's just too... abstract, I think.
>>>>> Most
>>>>> of the time anyway.
>>>>
>>>> ...well, gah.
>>>>
>>>> All right, we eventually want Norns that can think at or above /our/
>>>> level.
>>>> Actually, how did this part of the conversation start? *just got back
>>>> from
>>>> Lancaster*
>>>
>>> I have no idea. I think somebody was foolish enough to excuse for
>>> proposing JAVA.
>>
>> Um. Strange. *craves a pear, and is/are extremely irritable from having
>> been offered a pear right after the period when a pear /could/ have been
>> eaten and appreciated had just skahing /ENDED/*
>
> And I thought I had problems.

We'll assume that that's a joke. In any case, we got to eat a pear
recently. *bliss!*

>>>>>> And there's applied mathematics--physics, engineering, bus
>>>>>> timetables,
>>>>>> etc.
>>>>>> It's very important.
>>>>>
>>>>> Physics isn't applied mathematics. Neither is engineering. Not only.
>>>>
>>>> True, but applied mathematics is used in physics-related equations.
>>>> Same
>>>> with engineering.
>>>
>>> Oh, give me a break. I have a pretty good idea what maths mean in
>>> physics.
>>
>> Ah. Why did you ask, then?
>
> I'm pretty sure whatever I asked was rethorical...

....

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Intelligence is a matter of definition, of course.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *nods...* And (we think) irrelevant to the status of being
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> alive.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, you'd probably call anything intelligent "alive".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eh. Not necessarily--what about a stereotypical AI, such as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> SHODAN?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> You mean the typical AI with a god complex?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, that too. The god complex is optional--for another
>>>>>>>>>>>> example,
>>>>>>>>>>>> take
>>>>>>>>>>>> Halo's Cortana, though arguably as she semi-originated from a
>>>>>>>>>>>> living
>>>>>>>>>>>> human,
>>>>>>>>>>>> she doesn't count as much.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Didn't play Halo.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Pity. Ah, well.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Xbox, wasn't it?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes, but it was recently released for the PC, and is very good.
>>>>>>>> *nod
>>>>>>>> nod*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ::shrugs:: I don't really care.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Aiee.
>>>>>
>>>>> Huh?
>>>>
>>>> (Must... make a gamer... out of emmel...!)
>>>
>>> Forget it. I'm to old for that now. Ther are more important things.
>>
>> Hm. Such as AL/AI?
>
> More like UNI.

Oh. Bah.

....if to save one's life, one has to destroy the parts of one's life that
make it worth living... *soulful look*

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can't breathe, eat, reproduce, and Darwinian evolution
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> certainly
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> apply to it... intelligence, but death-based, rather than
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> life-based.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's fiction.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> So? There's nothing theoretical (so far) that says that it's
>>>>>>>>>>>> impossible,
>>>>>>>>>>>> and often science fiction predicts actual events long before
>>>>>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>>>>>> happen
>>>>>>>>>>>> (submarines? Men on the moon?).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> SDI?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ...what?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Google for it. Has something to do with "Project StarWars".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Er... how nice. *thinks* Wasn't that the one about shooting
>>>>>>>> missiles
>>>>>>>> before they hit?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (Scuba Diving International?)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Strategic Defense Initiative.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ohh. What science fiction predicted it?
>>>>>
>>>>> Deparment of Defence press releases, I think.
>>>>
>>>> Figures. How much did it (the science fiction) sell for?
>>>
>>> Hm... several milliards I think.
>>
>> Which is how much in pounds?
>
> Several milliards, I think.

There, there.

>>> I'm pretty sure Jule Verne's Nautilus didn't sound very likely back
>>> then...
>>
>> What? And as a note, intelligences on the lines of SHODAN actually /do/
>> sound reasonably likely.
>
> I must be living in another dimension...

Or maybe you know something that we don't.

>>>>>>>>> And
>>>>>>>>> remember, Diego was still around then.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> /And/ trying to hide from SHODAN, and then later betraying the
>>>>>>>> other
>>>>>>>> humans
>>>>>>>> and becoming SHODAN's pawn in exchange for his life (and, granted,
>>>>>>>> various
>>>>>>>> cyborgly abilities).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Well, it just did what it was told to. Obviously someone did a
>>>>>>> mistake
>>>>>>> stating what that was, but still.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Play... the game... again. How long has it been since you last did
>>>>>> so?
>>>>>> You seem to have forgotten a lot.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hm... decade?
>>>>
>>>> Dear Sidhe.
>>>
>>> Have you looked at the calendar lately? It's 2005 already.
>>
>> Startling. In any case, you need to play it again.
>
> For heavebs sake, I don't even know if I have any hardware that could
> run it.

....well, skah.

>>>>>>>> this necessary? What would be the concequences of removing it, or
>>>>>>>> changing
>>>>>>>> it?'. In a way, we could play the Sidhe. *grins*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We already are doing that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Heh... yes. It's nice to think about it, though--and of doing it
>>>>>> /personally/, instead of simply stating opinions, ideas, typing and
>>>>>> longing
>>>>>> to interfere directly.
>>>>>
>>>>> Erm, what?
>>>>
>>>> Feel free to elaborate.
>>>
>>> Huh?
>>
>> What are you asking?
>
> 'Erm, what?' like in 'What do you try to say?'.

Ah. Which part was unclear?

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-