Avant Brown Want to Play a Game?

105 posts / 0 new
Last post
arakish's picture
Avant Brown Want to Play a Game?

How about a poll?

Relevant Post: http://www.atheistrepublic.com/forums/debate-room/scientific-purpose-human-species-may-be-replicate-universes?page=4#comment-129736

Avant Brown: "It would be nice if you could start providing citations. What is you area of study? Perhaps you don't possess the faculties or experience needed to propose sensible arguments, and citations to substantiate your claims?"

According to you, the concept artificial intelligence has been around since 1958. Sorry, but you are wrong. Science Fiction beat science to the punch in 1927 with the movie Metropolis and the Wiki page.

When were you born? 2008? 2006?

I have studied computer science and simulated intelligence starting way back in 1979. Damn! Practically 40 years ago. Fuck me. Where the hell does the time go? However, I have studied many areas of science at the same time. Computer Science, Astrophysics (since 1969), Orbital Mechanics, Celestial Mechanics, Geography/Cartography, Geographic Information Science and Technology (I actually got the GIST), Geology, Geomorphic Deformations, Volcanology, Climatology. My actual Master's and Science Doctorate (ScD, not a true PhD) are in Volcanology and Global Climatology, respectively.

My specialty is not computer science and simulated intelligence. However, ever heard of "docking" windows? Me and a guy in Germany actually worked on writing the computer code that did that and sold the idea to Jasc Software, Inc., original makers of Paint Shop Pro. They had it first and everybody else copied it from there. Of course, since me and that guy sold it, others took the claim. He and I also separately sold it to other software companies, ending up making a fairly pretty penny on it. Let others get the credit. We got the money. ;-P

However, if we were to take a poll of ALL persons who have read your threads, who do you think would win? You, with your STEM PhD candidacy, and Wikipedia as your primary source; or Me, with nothing more than the knowledge I have learned over the last 40 years. Yes I have kept up with computer science. There just ain't much new to learn. Not overall.

Want to start a poll? Want to see who would win? And I would specifically ask everyone to keep any bias out of their vote. If you win, I shut up and let you proselytize all you want and I STFU!. If I win, you simply admit you are a New Age Religious Absolutist Apologist and YOU STFU!

You game?

rmfr

Subscription Note: 

Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.

Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.

Blue Grey Brain's picture
I am 25 years old, and I am

How about a poll?

Relevant Post: http://www.atheistrepublic.com/forums/debate-room/scientific-purpose-hum...

Avant Brown: "It would be nice if you could start providing citations. What is you area of study? Perhaps you don't possess the faculties or experience needed to propose sensible arguments, and citations to substantiate your claims?"

According to you, the concept artificial intelligence has been around since 1958. Sorry, but you are wrong. Science Fiction beat science to the punch in 1927 with the movie Metropolis and the Wiki page.

When were you born? 2008? 2006?

I have studied computer science and simulated intelligence starting way back in 1979. Damn! Practically 40 years ago. Fuck me. Where the hell does the time go? However, I have studied many areas of science at the same time. Computer Science, Astrophysics (since 1969), Orbital Mechanics, Celestial Mechanics, Geography/Cartography, Geographic Information Science and Technology (I actually got the GIST), Geology, Geomorphic Deformations, Volcanology, Climatology. My actual Master's and Science Doctorate (ScD, not a true PhD) are in Volcanology and Global Climatology, respectively.

My specialty is not computer science and simulated intelligence. However, ever heard of "docking" windows? Me and a guy in Germany actually worked on writing the computer code that did that and sold the idea to Jasc Software, Inc., original makers of Paint Shop Pro. They had it first and everybody else copied it from there. Of course, since me and that guy sold it, others took the claim. He and I also separately sold it to other software companies, ending up making a fairly pretty penny on it. Let others get the credit. We got the money. ;-P

However, if we were to take a poll of ALL persons who have read your threads, who do you think would win? You, with your STEM PhD candidacy, and Wikipedia as your primary source; or Me, with nothing more than the knowledge I have learned over the last 40 years. Yes I have kept up with computer science. There just ain't much new to learn. Not overall.

Want to start a poll? Want to see who would win? And I would specifically ask everyone to keep any bias out of their vote. If you win, I shut up and let you proselytize all you want and I STFU!. If I win, you simply admit you are a New Age Religious Absolutist Apologist and YOU STFU!

You game?

rmfr

I am 25 years old, and I am currently doing PhD work that combines Quantum Field Theory and Artificial Neural Networks. [Your expertise in artificial intelligence seems to be limited to academic coursework 40 years ago, from what I read above. Have you done any recent Ai work outside of school work 40 years ago? ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)]

~

Oddly, your words "There just ain't much new to learn. Not overall" are quite telling. Your words evoke an obscenely unrealistic attitude that reasonably contrasts the honesty of some of smartest people within the field of ai, who admittedly find it hard to keep up with the research.

~

1. Is this forum a research journal, or research paper?

~

2. If your answer to 1 is neither, why do you wish me to mostly present dense research papers to our audience here [I have cited dense resources a few times, but as I said before, for the purpose of convenience, as a pedagogical tool, I provide relevant Wikipedia references, in this forum setting. I of course, otherwise utilize dense papers as sources for my PhD work, and I have never once called Wikipedia a primary source.]

~

2.b Also, what do you typically use as reference to support your arguments here? ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

~

3. Do you feel human level general intelligence is special stuff that can't be otherwise replicated with high fidelity in inorganic matter? If so, why? [Please include citations. You ought to understand the importance of those, especially when you claim to have been in academia, however long ago that was]

  • [You can start by attempting to falsify AGI research, such as this one by Dr. Eray Ozkural, winner of Kurzweil AGI prize/2015.]
  • Nyarlathotep's picture
    Avant Brown - I am currently

    Avant Brown - I am currently doing PhD work that combines Quantum Field Theory and Artificial Neural Networks.

    What is the î component of acceleration, of a particle whose position is given by: (2t^3 + t^2 + 5t +8)ĵ ?

    David Killens's picture
    You know he will evade

    You know he will evade answering.

    Blue Grey Brain's picture
    What is the î component of

    What is the î component of acceleration, of a particle whose position is given by: (2t^3 + t^2 + 5t +8)ĵ ?

    It seems like you left out something important in your notation "(2t^3 + t^2 + 5t +8)ĵ", if I am not mistaken. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

    Albeit, "i" would be a unit vector.

    xenoview's picture
    You still haven't answered

    You still haven't answered Nyarl's question. Surely that equation should be easy for a person going after a PhD in computers.

    Edit

    Blue Grey Brain's picture
    You still haven't answered

    You still haven't answered Nayarl's question. Surely that equation should be easy for a person going after a PhD in computers.

    See my response above.

    xenoview's picture
    You still haven't answered

    You still haven't answered Nyarl's question.

    So what is the unit vector.

    Blue Grey Brain's picture
    You still haven't answered

    You still haven't answered Nyarl's question.

    So what is the unit vector.

    In this scenario, one possible answer is that " i " is a unit vector. Since you're not the original question's author, I'll await a response from said original author, to see if that is sufficient for such an author.

    ~

    As I stated prior, regardless of my answer above regarding unit vectors, Nyarlathotep's question seems to be malformed because:

    a. Nyarlathotep seemed to have mistakenly left out the unit vector " i " from his position "(2t^3 + t^2 + 5t +8)ĵ ".

    b. Nyarlathotep seemed to have mislabeled the unit vector " i " as " ' i ' of acceleration ", where acceleration would instead be the derivative of the position at some time " t ", while " i " would pertain to the unit vector in said position, rather than being " ' i ' of acceleration ".

    c. Nyarlathotep seemed to intentionally leave out a specification of time " t ", so given this scenario, I opted to simply label " i ", i.e. report what " i " was, namely a unit vector, regardless of my concerns as underlined in [a] and [b].

    Nyarlathotep's picture
    Avant Brown - Albeit, "i"

    Avant Brown - Albeit, "i" would be a unit vector.

    Yes, they are orthonormal unit vectors.

    Blue Grey Brain's picture
    Yes, they are orthonormal

    Avant Brown's words:
    - Albeit, "i" would be a unit vector.

    Nyarlatotep's words:

    Yes, they are orthonormal unit vectors

    Agreed and Upvoted.

    Nyarlathotep's picture
    @Avant Brown

    Avant Brown - Nyarlathotep seemed to have mistakenly left out...Nyarlathotep seemed to have mislabeled...

    I did not mislabel anything; do you have an answer?

    Blue Grey Brain's picture
    1. I thought you agreed that

    I did not mislabel anything; do you have an answer?

    1. I thought you agreed that yes, " i " is a unit vector.

    ~

    2. You did mislabel " i " above, [I'm not saying you didn't know that it was a unit vector, but rather that your wording was/is misleading.]

  • i.e. Is your wording " ' i ' of acceleration " a valid one? Or is acceleration actually the derivative of your position "(2t^3 + t^2 + 5t +8)ĵ ", at some time " t "?
  • ~

    3. Did you forget to include something in the position "(2t^3 + t^2 + 5t +8)ĵ "? ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

    Nyarlathotep's picture
    @Avant Brown

    @Avant Brown

    Again, I didn't mislabel anything. Do you have an answer?

    Blue Grey Brain's picture
    @Avant Brown

    @Avant Brown

    Again, I didn't mislabel anything. Do you have an answer?

    1. You already agreed to my earlier answer. Now you can ask for more specific answers, but that wouldn't suddenly eliminate my prior answer, which you agreed to be valid.

    2. Also, unless you address the error, I pointed out before [See here and here], I won't or rather can't answer your question to any sensible degree. I doubt you'll find it agreeable to answer malformed questions, to any sufficiently detailed degree.

    Nyarlathotep's picture
    Avant Brown - You already

    Avant Brown - You already agreed to my earlier answer.

    What?!? What exactly was your earlier answer?

    Blue Grey Brain's picture
    You quoted me here.

    What?!? What exactly was your earlier answer?

    You quoted me here.

    Also, could you please address the concerns I underlined here, which pertinently, precede your recent demand for additional answers?

    You could of course attempt to deflect, deny and distract from my earlier concerns [as seen here], without first addressing them, and I predict that such an outcome will possibly occur. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

    Nyarlathotep's picture
    @Avant Brown

    @Avant Brown
    A first year physics student could answer this question in seconds, I made it extremely easy on purpose.

    The fact that you think Albeit, "i" would be a unit vector is an answer to my question indicates that you are a fraud, no doubt about it.

    Blue Grey Brain's picture
    @Avant Brown

    @Avant Brown
    A first year physics student could answer this question in seconds, I made it extremely easy on purpose.

    You are a fraud, no doubt about it.

    You already agreed to an earlier answer I gave. It is quite clear that you agreed to my earlier answer by now.

    Now you're attempting to distract our audience from your earlier blunders, by demanding additional answers you know aren't possible unless you address my prior concerns. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

    Nyarlathotep's picture
    @Avant Brown

    @Avant Brown
    Dude, you asked if it was a unit vector, and I told you that it was. In fact, I made sure to mark it as unit vector in the question! I had no idea you were trying to offer that as the answer. That is not even the form an answer would have, it is worse than wrong, it is sheer madness. It's as bad as answering the question of "how fast your car can go", with the answer of "banana".

    Blue Grey Brain's picture
    <

    @Avant Brown
    Dude, you asked if it was a unit vector, and I told you that it was. In fact, I made sure to mark it as unit vector in the question! I had no idea you were trying to offer that as the answer. That is not even the form an answer would have, it is worse than wrong, it is sheer madness. It's as bad as answering the question of "how fast your car can go", with the answer of "banana".

    No, I didn't ask, I made a statement. I think this is where the misunderstanding culminated; you thought I was asking a question, but I was then offering a response/answer.

    1. Since I didn't know this forum supported laTex, I wasn't looking for any unit vector symbol. [Although it seems one can apparently get unit vector symbols to show up here without laTex, as you demonstrated, perhaps through unicode.]

    2. In fact, I tried to apply "\uvec{i}" or "\hat{i}" and other variants throughout my many responses to you, but since those didn't work, I opted to just use " i " instead.

  • What did you use to properly paste the hat/i combination here? Did you copy it from some source elsewhere?
  • Did you just notice in posing your question above, that you had copied those symbols to make your original question, since you didn't back then indicate that the symbols weren't present in my response when you agreed that ' i " was a unit vector? [Notice that my answer, which you agreed to, also excluded the /hat symbol as well]
  • If you had disagreed all along regarding the " i " that I specified to be a unit vector, why did you agree to my response referring to " i " as a unit vector?
  • Nyarlathotep's picture
    Avant Brown - What did you

    Avant Brown - What did you use to properly paste the hat/i combination here?

    It's unicode; you wouldn't think I would need to say that to a PhD candidate AI researcher.

    It seems you are a fraud on both counts: with the physics and computer science.

    Blue Grey Brain's picture
    It's unicode; you wouldn't

    It's unicode; you wouldn't think I would need to say that to a PhD candidate AI researcher.

    It seems you are a fraud on both counts: with the physics and computer science.

    1. Yes, see the end of point 1 in my earlier comment, I suspected it could have been unicode, although I didn't bother to apply it, since you had already agreed that " i " was a unit vector.

    2. You're still attempting to distract our audience from your prior blunders. For example,

  • if you had disagreed all along regarding the " i " that I specified to be a unit vector, why did you agree to my response referring to " i " as a unit vector?
  • Nyarlathotep's picture
    Avant Brown - " i " that I

    Avant Brown - " i " that I specified to be a unit vector, why did you agree to my response referring to " i " as a unit vector?

    It is really simple. i is a unit vector. That is why I marked it as a unit vector in the question! So when you stated(or asked if) it was a unit vector I agreed; BUT THAT ISN'T THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION!

    Blue Grey Brain's picture
    No, I didn't ask if it was a

    Avant Brown's words:
    ...." i " that I specified to be a unit vector, why did you agree to my response referring to " i " as a unit vector?

    Nyarlatotep's words:
    It is really simple. i is a unit vector. That is why I marked it as a unit vector in the question! So when you stated(or asked if) it was a unit vector I agreed; BUT THAT ISN'T THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION!

    No, I didn't ask if it was a unit vector, I made a statement.Also, long before you claimed you thought I was asking a question about the unit vector, I additionally [separate from my first response] made another response encompassing a statement/answer about the unit vector].

    Notice the statement was terminated with a "." and not a "?". [See The Basic Signs of Punctuation ]

    I think this is where the misunderstanding culminated; you thought I was asking a question, but I was then offering a response/answer.

    Nyarlathotep's picture
    Avant Brown - I think this is

    Avant Brown - I think this is where the misunderstanding culminated; you thought I was asking a question, but I was then offering a response/answer.

    Yes, the answer you gave was so ridiculous, that I made the mistake of giving you the benefit of the doubt and assumed (incorrectly) that it was a question. But since you have reaffirmed that was in fact your answer many times now; it is clear you are a fraud. I have to assume this is why you couldn't give me the exponential function in the other thread.

    Blue Grey Brain's picture
    Yes, the answer you gave was

    Yes, the answer you gave was so ridiculous, that I made the mistake of giving you the benefit of the doubt and assumed (incorrectly) that it was a question. But since you have reaffirmed that was in fact your answer many times now; it is clear you are a fraud. I have to assume this is why you couldn't give me the exponential function in the other thread.

    1. Yes, so ridiculous, that you agreed that " i " was the unit vector. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

    2. An appropriate answer to the exponential had long been given. Whether you are willing to visit the source pointed out to you, is not up to me.

    3. And you are still yet to approach your prior blunders, as I underlined here. A first year physics student would acknowledge that the position "(2t^3 + t^2 + 5t +8)ĵ " you supposedly gave, is malformed.

    Nyarlathotep's picture
    Avant Brown - A first year

    Avant Brown - A first year physics student would acknowledge that the position "(2t^3 + t^2 + 5t +8)ĵ " you supposedly gave, is malformed.

    Please tell us exactly how it is "malformed". And please don't link to a previous post; just tell us.

    Blue Grey Brain's picture
    Please tell us exactly how it

    Please tell us exactly how it is "malformed". And please don't link to a previous post; just tell us.

    I detailed this in a very early response.

    Why bother to repeat it, when I can trivially link to it?

    Nyarlathotep's picture
    @Avant Brown

    @Avant Brown
    Trolls don't get banned very often around here, because it is difficult to be sure they are trolling, and no mod wants to be the person to make that kind of mistake. But you have managed to clear this very difficult hurdle, as I now have no doubt. Congratulations or in order! Of the 1000's of people I've banned, are you the first to be banned for trolling.

    arakish's picture
    As I thought. I gave him a

    As I thought. I gave him a day off from the site and shoots himself in the foot. And he completely ignored the challenge. Typical theist.

    rmfr

    Pages

    Donating = Loving

    Heart Icon

    Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

    Or make a one-time donation in any amount.