Five Bodied
 
Advanced Search
   
 
Home Register FAQ Memberlist Usergroups  
 
 

Five Bodied Forum Index Being Five Bodied The Curling Test
Display posts from previous:   
      All times are GMT - 5 Hours  
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.  This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.

Sun Nov 07, 2010 6:49 pm
Author Message
Linus Minimax



Joined: 18 Jun 2005
Posts: 333
Location: Toronto

Post subject: The Curling Test Reply with quote

frater222 wrote:
Btw, curling is way cooler and more an 'advanced' sport than hockey. curling is chess on ice, so, i think that curling is another major contribution to international culture that canada has given.


Although it's true that curling is originally a Scottish invention, it's still fair to say that Canada has 'given' it to international culture since it was Russ Howard ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russ_Howard ) who invented the "Free Guard Zone" rule that prevents any given 'end' (curling's equivalent of baseball's 'innings') from being an abysmally boring place-a-guard, take-it-out, place-a-guard, take-it-out dialectic that only gets interesting if someone makes a mistake ... seriously, it used to be that the more skilled the players, the more unwatchably monotonous the match. As the wiki article puts it: "it is likely that without the excitement this rule adds to the sport it would not have become an Olympic event in the 1990s."


frater222 wrote:
i predict curling will be THE sport of the PARAMODERN AGE.



I agree and I would love to see that prediction come true in the sense of it becoming very popular -- one hopeful symptom is the emergence of China as a top contender in international curling (their women's team did the most incredible thing when they beat Canada in their Olympic match this year ... (remind me, me, to tell that story later))

But I want it to come true in a more important sense that speaks to the heart of what is PARAMODERN about the AGE .... I want 'the Curling Test' to obsolesce 'the Turing Test'.

'The Turing Test', if you don't know, is named for Alan Turing, who singlehandedly defeated the Nazis (or, at least, singlehandedly designed the primitive computer that defeated their 'Enigma' code-machines, which was arguably the crucial factor in the Nazis' ultimate defeat ... to recognize and honour his genius and to show their gratitude for his supercrucial contribution to the war effort, the Brits convicted him of being gay, put him under house arrest, and he killed himself from the shame ... which story gets my vote as the #1 most appalling act of ingratitude in all of human history). His idea was: if an AI program can pass this test, it has earned the adjective "intelligent". The test is very simple: the tester interacts, on a text-only basis, with both a real person and the AI program being tested. If the tester cannot tell which is the person and which is the program, the program passes.

It's a good test, but the obvious flaw is the verbal-mental bias in defining 'intelligence'. It's interesting that curling is often referred to as 'chess on ice' because chess is also an unsatisfactory test for AI, since the much-ballyhooed victories of programs over human Grandmasters has less to do with intelligence than with sheer computational outmuscling. I remember reading something Larouche wrote about how the discovery that the knight's possible moves were finite and analysable instantly made chess fundamentally uninteresting to him ... I think in this context 'uninteresting' is interchangeable with 'biased in favour of computers'.

"Artificial Intelligence is devoid of intelligence because it is devoid of artifice", wrote Baudrillard in perfect crystallographer mode .... and while the Turing Test obviously requires greater artifice, the criticism then becomes ".... because it is devoid of EMBODIMENT." However, when it comes to con-tests between computers and humans, 'embodiment' would seem to fundamentally favour humans. The Curling Test ( = if a program can repeatedly defeat human world champion curlers, it has earned the adjective "intelligent") is a perfect compromise because the embodiment-factor is truly minimal (hence the resistance to curling's status as a 'sport', and to curlers' status as 'Olympians', since you don't have to be in great shape (an 'athlete') to be great at it, similarly to billiards or golf). The only embodiment-hardware a computer program would require in order to curl is an arm that can aim and push a rock, a hand that can spin the rock as it is released, a visual input to track the rock's progress down the sheet, and a voice that can tell human sweepers whether or not to sweep. Simple.

So simple, it might even seem at first that this test also unfairly favours computers -- if they can aim flawlessly and regulate the 'weight' of any given shot with quantitative precision, then even the most impossibly reliable human curler could only get an upper hand via strategy. In reality, however, there is no such thing as a 'regulation sheet' of ice, and every match requires the curlers to get a feel for how fast the ice is running and how well or how poorly the rocks are able to 'grip' and curl. Both of these conditions can vary from one part of the sheet to another (especially between the centre and the margins). Even better, they change slowly over the course of the match as the ice is repeatedly glided over and vigorously swept, so programs and humans alike have to constantly re-assess what constitutes the correct weight and how much the rock can be relied upon to curl. To me, these factors seem to add up to a pretty level playing field.

So, 'the Curling Test'. Surely it would only be one type (or quadrant?) of 'intelligence' being tested and contested .... but it would just as surely be a useful and (perhaps more importantly) entertaining challenge for curlers and AI researchers alike, which is why I intend to send a version of this idea to a handful of luminaries in both fields. The similar spelling is just bonus gravy that might help sell the idea to frontrunning-AI-researcher Douglas Hofstadter's sense of humour, for example. Hopefully the idea would also be amusing and interesting, at least, to his colleague H. R. Ekbia, author of the excellent book 'Artificial Dreams: the quest for non-biological intelligence', which reviews the various strategies adopted by AI-builders over the last fifty years.

(It looks like this whole book is available on GoogleBooks, which is great, but when I put the gigantic link in here it reformatted the width of the fivebodied window, so instead I'll just recommend you look it up)

If anyone has any comments or suggestions to improve or embellish the pitch, they'd be much appreciated.


frater222 wrote:
regarding curling::

i recently declared on facebook that::

"curling is now the sexiest women's sport, surpasing beach vollyball and tennis...forget the grunting of womens tennis...give me the 'YEP, YEP, HARD, HAAARRRDDD, FAST, FAST, FASSSSTTTT, YEEEEP, YEEEPP, YEEEEEEEAAAAAHHHH' of curling any day...".....


Yes, curling's sex appeal is acoustic and comedic, and I'm sure if they ever get 'Team AI' on the ice, they'll program it not only to give basic yes/no sweeping commands, but to do the whole yelling thing in the famous 'Stephen Hawking' deadpan, if only to make the event that much more telegenic.
 
View user's profile Send private message
      Back To Top  

Mon Nov 08, 2010 6:56 pm
Author Message
frater222



Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Posts: 688

Post subject: Reply with quote

Great post
_________________
-frater 222
"you were, tootoo too ...the graced of gods...& salus of the wake...Winner...primed at the studience, propredicted...the choice of ages wise! Spickspookspokesman of our specturesque...we miss your smile."
 
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
      Back To Top  

Tue Mar 08, 2011 3:59 pm
Author Message
Linus Minimax



Joined: 18 Jun 2005
Posts: 333
Location: Toronto

Post subject: The Jeopardy! Test Reply with quote

Okay, how about some less 'xtranicity'-flavoured anomalism?

I trust we all heard about the newly-nuanced AI "Watson" kicking human ass on Jeopardy!??

But what about that completely perplexing finale?? I'm referring of course to the final Final Jeopardy! question, whose category was U.S. CITIES, which clue described a city whose largest airport is named after a WWII hero and whose 2nd largest airport is named after a WWII battle .... both humans got the correct answer 'Chicago', which I guess must be some really obscure city Watson had never heard of, since 'his' answer was "What is Toronto?????"

That's right, Watson confirmed the resentful intuition of rural Canadians everywhere, that Toronto is actually a U.S. city! This was a major 'WTF???' moment ..... I almost wish that people had died as a result of this error, because I really really want to see a post-Challenger-style expert-helmed analysis (Hofstadter as Feynman??) of what the hell went wrong in Watson's "brain" ..... how was Toronto not eliminated from consideration??? The only thing I can think of is that the sheer number of South Pacific battles with the word 'Island' in them made Toronto's tiny 'Island Airport' seem like the overwhelming favourite.... ???? It's too bad since for all other questions we were shown Watson's top three answers with a percentage indicating how sure 'he' was ..... but not for that one.

But I lie --- the other thing I can think of is that Watson got raped at the last minute by the AM, nostalgic for its boyhood with Bob in Toronto .... ????
 
View user's profile Send private message
      Back To Top  

Tue Mar 08, 2011 4:56 pm
Author Message
frater222



Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Posts: 688

Post subject: Reply with quote

Maybe it was a joke
Maybe the comps are smarter than we think
See my convos with clever bot I posted on here for example
_________________
-frater 222
"you were, tootoo too ...the graced of gods...& salus of the wake...Winner...primed at the studience, propredicted...the choice of ages wise! Spickspookspokesman of our specturesque...we miss your smile."
 
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
      Back To Top  

Sun Mar 13, 2011 12:59 am
Author Message
Linus Minimax



Joined: 18 Jun 2005
Posts: 333
Location: Toronto

Post subject: Re: The Curling Test Reply with quote

Linus Minimax wrote:

The test is very simple: the tester interacts, on a text-only basis, with both a real person and the AI program being tested. If the tester cannot tell which is the person and which is the program, the program passes.


I liked Jon Stewart's interview with Brian Christian, author of 'The Most Human Human', about an award given to Turing Test participants who are most successful in convincing the testers that they were, in fact, human .... BC said something about programs that are designed to be wacky or off-the-wall, but "you eventually begin to suspect there's no one at home". This fairly nails what I've been aiming at in my attempts to articulate that the Android Meme is a mirage (or is missing its fundamental) .... While there may be coincidences that are true 'miracles' (Authored by "God"), and/or ones involving Angels/Aliens/Ancestors/Astraltravellers, there is a sizeable swath of the synchronicity spectrum where, despite sometimes overwhelming evidence of 'intelligent design', "there's no one at home"..... no one but yourself, that is. The apt analogy seems to be a parapsychological photocopier, where magnetized motes of resonant memelets clump together in reliably irrandom arrangements because they are attracted to the ley-lines of expectation and credulity 'set down' or projected by your own psychological set ... it is the flawlessness of the intelligence of the design that eventually gives the lie to the illusion of external authorship. What I'm trying to say is, if I were to respond to 'Android Meme's Xenochrony' as a Turing Tester determining whether these 'texts' are Authored Miracles or simulations thereof, I would guess there's no one home......
.... which doesn't necessarily mean that the program wasn't Authored!

Anyway, it was especially funny to hear Stewart propose that a program will be human the day it can stumble, then (in a theory-of-mind panic) claim "I meant to do that" .... since, for the SubGenii, 'human' is a synonym for 'pink', and the alt.slack crowd diagnose "I meant to do that"-syndrome as a fairly sure sign of pinkness (or residual Conspiracy programming, at the least).
 
View user's profile Send private message
      Back To Top  

Sun Mar 13, 2011 10:32 am
Author Message
frater222



Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Posts: 688

Post subject: Re: The Curling Test Reply with quote

Dude nice analysis

I agree more or less


I think the author is a gnostic computer programmer eons ago by minds more alien and complex that we cant conceive of

Bill gates times a googa za bill zillion



Linus Minimax wrote:
Linus Minimax wrote:

The test is very simple: the tester interacts, on a text-only basis, with both a real person and the AI program being tested. If the tester cannot tell which is the person and which is the program, the program passes.


I liked Jon Stewart's interview with Brian Christian, author of 'The Most Human Human', about an award given to Turing Test participants who are most successful in convincing the testers that they were, in fact, human .... BC said something about programs that are designed to be wacky or off-the-wall, but "you eventually begin to suspect there's no one at home". This fairly nails what I've been aiming at in my attempts to articulate that the Android Meme is a mirage (or is missing its fundamental) .... While there may be coincidences that are true 'miracles' (Authored by "God"), and/or ones involving Angels/Aliens/Ancestors/Astraltravellers, there is a sizeable swath of the synchronicity spectrum where, despite sometimes overwhelming evidence of 'intelligent design', "there's no one at home"..... no one but yourself, that is. The apt analogy seems to be a parapsychological photocopier, where magnetized motes of resonant memelets clump together in reliably irrandom arrangements because they are attracted to the ley-lines of expectation and credulity 'set down' or projected by your own psychological set ... it is the flawlessness of the intelligence of the design that eventually gives the lie to the illusion of external authorship. What I'm trying to say is, if I were to respond to 'Android Meme's Xenochrony' as a Turing Tester determining whether these 'texts' are Authored Miracles or simulations thereof, I would guess there's no one home......
.... which doesn't necessarily mean that the program wasn't Authored!

Anyway, it was especially funny to hear Stewart propose that a program will be human the day it can stumble, then (in a theory-of-mind panic) claim "I meant to do that" .... since, for the SubGenii, 'human' is a synonym for 'pink', and the alt.slack crowd diagnose "I meant to do that"-syndrome as a fairly sure sign of pinkness (or residual Conspiracy programming, at the least).

_________________
-frater 222
"you were, tootoo too ...the graced of gods...& salus of the wake...Winner...primed at the studience, propredicted...the choice of ages wise! Spickspookspokesman of our specturesque...we miss your smile."
 
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
      Back To Top  
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.  This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


      Back To Top  

Page 1 of 1
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Avalanche style by What Is Real © 2004