[The Java Posse] A Brain For your PC

[jitesh dundas]

Dear All,

Wouldn't it be nice if my PC starts thinking like us and solve our Java errors?

We all know that AI is giving machines the ability to become better.
The highest goal in this direction is to give computers the ability
to think like the human brain. With IBM moving in this direction, it
is not a distant dream anymore.

I wanted your opinion on this aspect and how could Java and C/C++
help in making this happen?

Regards,
Jitesh Dundas

On 5/25/10, Peter Becker <peter.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes, Kevin. This is the walled garden thread, don't post anything that
> hasn't been cleared with the management. And never ever consider
> changing the subject line, otherwise you get into trouble with the
> Google overlords.
>
> Peter
>
>
> On 25/05/10 01:17, Rakesh wrote:
>> I think you posted to the wrong thread Kevin!
>>
>> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Kevin Wright
>> <kev.lee...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Of course, the whole idea of a GUI came out of Xerox PARC, it was never
>>> Apple's invention.
>>> The GUI was actually invented as a better way to interact with the (then)
>>> new Smalltalk language, ironically one that is now restricted from
>>> apple's
>>> "walled garden"
>>> Even more ironically, Objective-C is basically a C/Smalltalk hybrid (the
>>> memory safety of C coupled with all the blazing speed of smalltalk -
>>> what's
>>> not to like!), so it makes sense that C would also be allowed. As for
>>> C++?
>>> That's anybody's guess!
>>>
>>>
>>> On 24 May 2010 15:13, jitesh dundas<jbdu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hey Rakesh,
>>>>
>>>> No offense,but I just wanted to give my opinion.Anyways,please don't
>>>> reply to this question.
>>>>
>>>> I still think your conversation should be technical but I guess people
>>>> are enjoying this..
>>>> 'One thing though,apple is really really good in bringing out good
>>>> stuff..
>>>>
>>>> Please excuse me for the inconvenience.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> jd
>>>>
>>>> On 5/24/10, Rakesh<rakesh.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Jitesh,
>>>>>
>>>>> its considered a bit rude to hijack someone else's thread.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please start your own to discuss the wonders Apple has bestowed upon
>>>>> us.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>
>>>>> R
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 5:40 PM, jitesh dundas<jbdu...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree with this reply. Why are we not talking about the innovations
>>>>>> that Apple is bringing out. What about the beautiful GUI that Apple
>>>>>> has and which Microsoft just copied..This is what changes business&
>>>>>> the way technology evolves..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We don't discuss about such things, but just plain old business stuff
>>>>>> sometimes....
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One good question here is to see how Apple takes its inventions and
>>>>>> creates a Revolution..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> COULD WE EXPECT THIS FROM APPLE?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any ideas?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Jitesh Dundas
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/21/10, Casper Bang<caspe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I absolutely think that people are giving Apple a harder time than
>>>>>>>> they would other companies because these people have projected
>>>>>>>> ideals
>>>>>>>> on to them.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I disagree. You know what would happen if Microsoft tried some of the
>>>>>>> stuff Apple has been pulling off? You wouldn't hear the end of it!
>>>>>>> Jobs rules like Bill Gates never did. Mind you, Apple traditionally
>>>>>>> has been able to do their monopoly game simply by being small enough
>>>>>>> for nobody to care. That is no longer the case however; call it the
>>>>>>> price of success. Apple is bound to get a taste of this, especially
>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>> they seem to prefer fist-fights rather than shaking hands.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So thats my point - Apple is what Apple does and its really no
>>>>>>>> different than most companies (it wants to make money by cornering a
>>>>>>>> market and locking in users). A lot of you guys (not everyone, just
>>>>>>>> the people really, really horrified at Apple's hypocrisy) just can't
>>>>>>>> face that and need to vent rather than just stop buying the
>>>>>>>> products.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Again I think you are attempting to stereotype and oversimplify,
>>>>>>> meaning none of the replies since your OP really sinked in as viable
>>>>>>> reasons. It's not about venting but about protecting consumers (even
>>>>>>> those who do not know they need it) from a mono-culture where you're
>>>>>>> told what to believe rather than think on your own. That really has
>>>>>>> nothing specifically to do with capitalism or betrayal, just plain
>>>>>>> common sense. After all, history is full of examples of what happens
>>>>>>> when you stop asking questions and just blindly follow.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /Casper
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>>>> Groups
>>>>>>> "The Java Posse" group.
>>>>>>> To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>>>>>> javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.
>>>>>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>>> Groups
>>>>>> "The Java Posse" group.
>>>>>> To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>>>>> javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.
>>>>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>> Groups
>>>>> "The Java Posse" group.
>>>>> To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>>>> javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.
>>>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups
>>>> "The Java Posse" group.
>>>> To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>>> javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.
>>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Kevin Wright
>>>
>>> mail/google talk: kev.lee...@googlemail.com
>>> wave: kev.lee...@googlewave.com
>>> skype: kev.lee.wright
>>> twitter: @thecoda
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>>> "The Java Posse" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "The Java Posse" group.
> To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>
>

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.

[Peter Becker]

Hey -- at least time you bothered with a segway. This is just lazy and/or ignorant.

And you will have changed the thread subject for all the poor GMail users now -- they will get confused about where to find the old thread. ;-)

To still answer the question you pose: "The real problem is not whether machines think, but whether men do." (B.F. Skinner, via Civ4). Having dealt with semantic web technologies quite a bit I tell you it is mostly dreaming. If you want to deal with Java errors, grab PMD and Findbugs.

  Peter

[Kevin Wright]

You mean segue, right?

Though a thinking segway would be pretty cool!  Especially if I could build one using Lego Mindstorms...

[jitesh dundas]

Thanks to Kevin and Peter for the replies.

Peter,I haven't just changed the subjects. This is something seriously
persued by scientists.
Maybe Java could be used for the thinking mechanisms.
Every action is a result of a complex algorithm being executed. In our
case,the algorithm is very complex and evolved.
Getting a simulator ready of the level of a rat/cat is is indeed significant.

As time goes by,we will see more of such inventions.

I was wondering how could thinking be influenced by Java.
Is Java giving the entire set of functionality to do such things .Or
do we need another language for this.

Java for AI would be pretty cool. I came across several simulations
but I would really give Kevin's idea a deep thought.

Regards,
jd

[Steel City Phantom]

friend of mine did an image search engine using this once

http://sourceforge.net/projects/joone/

he said it was a major pain and training the network was one of the most complex things he has ever done.  but he said it worked out not so bad.  some of the older c++ neural networks frameworks are much more advanced but this worked for images.

but to the best of my knowledge neural networks are the closest thing to cognitive thinking AI's there really are.

i do remember an interesting company several years ago that designed a neural network that allowed them to systematically break connections in the network.  they called it a thinking program (but it really wasn't).  say your a song writer that is having writing block.  they would load the lyrics of every song imaginable into the neural network and systematically start breaking connections in the network and see how it reconnects the orphaned data into the network.  then when they got to a critical mass they would look at it and see how it reconnected the words.  most of it was jibberish but sometimes it came up with good ideas.  when i saw the report they said Crest had used them to brainstorm about a new toothbrush (made sense, how many ways can  you make a toothbrush?) and the result was the inspiration for the Crest Reach toothbrush.

as far as cognitive thinking AI's i was watching an interesting show on the history channel not to long ago about robots.  this researcher at MIT was on it and he said as far as cognitive decision making for autonomous robots (say data on star trek, IRobot, C3PO, R2D2, etc ) about 30 years ago MIT made a bunch of autonomous, cognitive thinking robots that were able to realize they walked into a wall and cognitively back up and walk another direction without walking into another wall.  he said the dirty little secret of cognitive thinking engines is the only difference between then and now is today they put sensors on the little robots so they figure out they are about to walk into a wall before they actually do.  he said they damage less robots that way.  he said the problem is we havn't invented a language or database yet that can think.  we have stuff that can statistically anticipate, but not think.

--
You want it fast, cheap, or right.  Pick two!!

[jitesh dundas]

Very interesting reply my friend.

So could we think of such a mechanism or concept.

Regards,
JD

>> javaposse+...@googlegroups.com<javaposse%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
>> .

[Moandji Ezana]

In this vein, the Eureka Machine is pretty interesting. It was also discussed in a recent episode of Radiolab.

Moandji

[Peter Becker]

Oops, yes I did. Talking about ignorance... -- although I guess it's more general incompetence in this case :-)

   Peter

[Fabrizio Giudici]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 5/25/10 06:12 , jitesh dundas wrote:
>
> Getting a simulator ready of the level of a rat/cat is is indeed
significant.
>

Well, rats aren't supposed to write software (just to refer to your
original question). Well, maybe with the exception of Ratbert, who's
not supposed to be agile, anyway 8-)
When (and if) scientist will be able to simulate a monkey, at least we
could consider the thing for testing. Earlier than that, I think
there's nothing to really discuss about.


- --
Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager
Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere."
java.net/blog/fabriziogiudici - www.tidalwave.it/people
Fabrizio...@tidalwave.it
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkv7lUsACgkQeDweFqgUGxfJeQCfQe56CHiMQDnPIeD3kL/C7UTF
RUAAn0y36+PYfiCwAQGiqIUGaIm0YRWj
=UfRM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[jitesh dundas]

Thanks for the response. However, I beg to differ on this point. The brain of a cat/rat is not simple. You have psychology tests done on them to understand some of the human ways of behavior. At the very least my friend, they are living beings right. Then this is definitely one step forward in this direction.

 

Regards,

Jitesh Dundas

[Christian Catchpole]

I have thought about this at length.. not that i claim to have any
great insight.. other than, even if we could do it, there is no real
point to making machines "behave like man". Most of the early AI
dreams seemed very arrogant and self-absorbed. Making software that
could "pretend to be human" was the highest goal of machines. We have
plenty of humans who are good at being humans. Sure, there is room
for improvement with user-interfaces and computer-human interaction.
This is a worthy goal.

With "AI" it's so easy to talk in abstract. I don't think we should
confuse "general intelligence" with "human characteristics". We
should start capitalising on what machines are good at and help them
organise data and functionality (code) more effectively. Not this
hodge-podge of operating systems, applications and file formats that
we have today. I'm not trying to discount anyone's dream. I have my
own dream that I'm been (unsuccessfully) trying to achieve in some
small way. I don't think the future is HAL 9000.. but i certainly
hope it's not SQL and PHP either. I look to science fiction and stuff
like "max headroom" and "minority report". The "system" is homogenous
and connected and it just works. It's not HTTP 404 errors and
microsoft office.

But to the original point, I do see Java as a potential platform were
we can achieve such things simply because it's a virtual machine that
"is a turing machine". Classes can be written with minimal side
effects and dependencies. "pure" code if you will. you can argue the
type system and other semantics, but it does have this going for it.

I was thinking recently about the difference between pragmatism and
idealism. I think we need to be pragmatic in our approaches but
ultimately idealistic in our goals.

[Fabrizio Giudici]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 5/25/10 12:38 , jitesh dundas wrote:
>
> Thanks for the response. However, I beg to differ on this point.
> The brain of a cat/rat is not simple. You have psychology tests
> done on them to understand some of the human ways of behavior. At
> the very least my friend, they are living beings right. Then this
> is definitely one step forward in this direction.

I didn't write that their brain is "simple". I wrote that they don't
write software.

- --
Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager
Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere."
java.net/blog/fabriziogiudici - www.tidalwave.it/people
Fabrizio...@tidalwave.it
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkv7uVMACgkQeDweFqgUGxcj3gCgmDWBGj1bLX8/Ub1iC3sHcW35
gQMAn03dr/3u3u8++hm9/WZUd0ERTrNL
=yrKq

[Casper Bang]

It's an interesting subject for sure, dating back to Plato Vs.
Aristotle. I used to believe futurists like Ray Kurzweil etc. but now
I am not so sure. While we will no doubt continue to simulate larger
and more complex brains, we have yet to properly define intelligence
let alone self-awareness (humans primary driver).

Nature itself does not seem particular intelligent, it relies on crude
trial-n-error (survival-of-the-fittest) and tracer-bullets (mutations)
rather than up-front design. Indeed, modern agile processes looks an
awful lot like a step back to nature.

The fact that you can hire 100 teams to solve a problem* and they will
all get to very different solutions, suggests to me that it makes
little sense to equate computer intelligence and human intelligence.
When all 100 teams start to arrive at the (very near) same solution,
then we may be more ready to define "intelligence".

/Casper

*Not a pure algorithmic problem a la TSP.

[shainnif ismail]

I went to a talk at Edinburgh University many years ago, about Neurolinguistics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurolinguistics)

 

specifically on Semantics, and its use in computer science eg translating human language to code using intelligent programs, mapping concepts rather than words.

 

It remember being very impressed and that was about 1999.

shaine

[Fabrizio Giudici]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 5/25/10 15:17 , shainnif ismail wrote:
> I went to a talk at Edinburgh University many years ago, about
> Neurolinguistics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurolinguistics)
>
> specifically on Semantics, and its use in computer science eg
> translating human language to code using intelligent programs,
> mapping concepts rather than words.
>
> It remember being very impressed and that was about 1999.
>

So, why in 2010 automatic translations still suck?

- --
Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager
Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere."
java.net/blog/fabriziogiudici - www.tidalwave.it/people
Fabrizio...@tidalwave.it
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkv70L8ACgkQeDweFqgUGxedkgCfeDXWhT2ZXG6oumK2GG6WEXer
3LQAmwSuc8OmgFfDGXwMN5ql/6q8Dw+f
=zC3A
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Casper Bang]

I also studied hypermedia and here 10 years after I have yet to be
convinced that the theory can map to practice (i.e. bidirectional
links, annotations etc.) If anyone can bring this forward in practice,
it has got to be Google. And yet, look at how crappy live translation
of captions works for YouTube. That part will be particular
interesting to monitor when GoogleTV launches.

On May 25, 3:17 pm, shainnif ismail <shain...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> I went to a talk at Edinburgh University many years ago, about
> Neurolinguistics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurolinguistics)
>
> specifically on Semantics, and its use in computer science eg
> translating human language to code using intelligent programs, mapping
> concepts rather than words.
>
> It remember being very impressed and that was about 1999.
>
> shaine
>

> On 25 May 2010 13:56, Casper Bang <casper.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > It's an interesting subject for sure, dating back to Plato Vs.
> > Aristotle. I used to believe futurists like Ray Kurzweil etc. but now
> > I am not so sure. While we will no doubt continue to simulate larger
> > and more complex brains, we have yet to properly define intelligence
> > let alone self-awareness (humans primary driver).
>
> > Nature itself does not seem particular intelligent, it relies on crude
> > trial-n-error (survival-of-the-fittest) and tracer-bullets (mutations)
> > rather than up-front design. Indeed, modern agile processes looks an
> > awful lot like a step back to nature.
>
> > The fact that you can hire 100 teams to solve a problem* and they will
> > all get to very different solutions, suggests to me that it makes
> > little sense to equate computer intelligence and human intelligence.
> > When all 100 teams start to arrive at the (very near) same solution,
> > then we may be more ready to define "intelligence".
>
> > /Casper
>
> > *Not a pure algorithmic problem a la TSP.
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "The Java Posse" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

> > javaposse+...@googlegroups.com<javaposse%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups .com>
> > .

> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group.
> To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.

> For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.

[shainnif ismail]

well these machines do have 500,000 years of evolution to catch up on, the analogy i recall was these system are like single cell organisms that we need to force evolve.

 

Regards
Shaine Ismail

[Kevin Wright]

So we can't just create these things, we have to evolve them.

You know... this really screws with the "intelligent design" theory :)

--
Kevin Wright

mail/google talk: kev.lee...@googlemail.com
wave: kev.lee...@googlewave.com
skype: kev.lee.wright
twitter: @thecoda

[Fabrizio Giudici]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 5/25/10 16:03 , Kevin Wright wrote:
> So we can't just create these things, we have to evolve them.
>
> You know... this really screws with the "intelligent design" theory :)
>

(resending, because Thunderbird crashed while sending)

"Intelligent design" is a matter of metaphysics, and as such it
doesn't necessarily clash with a scientific evolutionary theory.
Metaphysics is just a complementary way to model the world for people
who think that science can only access to a subset of the world.

Back to the rats point: if I discovered a planet with a population of
rats, the fact that they in future evolve to self-conscious and
intelligent beings is just an hypothesis, not a necessity. In a
similar fashion, while I reckon that AI is (slowing) evolving, there
is no evidence that guarantees that it won't get stuck at some point
between rats and us.

- --
Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager
Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere."
java.net/blog/fabriziogiudici - www.tidalwave.it/people
Fabrizio...@tidalwave.it
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEUEARECAAYFAkv74YAACgkQeDweFqgUGxd37ACXbiwcZDKWUs6cdl8FKDtbmTRg
sQCfcdHhsVM8LPP8V0/yNkNEeMUqhOA=
=AMWI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[jitesh dundas]

I agree with you my friend on the google part. I would suggest IBM to
be the best in making the human brain anytime.
I don't know what 'intelligence' means to other people, but I will be
happy with the part where one can do the work better than the average
person's ability. Emotional intelligence is important but if my
computer does software development for me with its thinking, then
that's good enough for me.

Hope that happens in 5 years..Anyone aware who is trying to build a
huuman-brain simulator besides IBM?

Regards,
Jitesh Dundas

[jitesh dundas]

Actually Kevin, this supports the intelligent design t
eory..Evolution is the next step in product of intelligent behavior.

No wonder computers are becoming smarter with our support.
However, evolution in computers will be the point when we can call
computers equal to us ...long way to go..lbut intelligence & software
development ,well that should be not far away ....

I request replies in this direction...

Regards,
jd

>>> > > javaposse+...@googlegroups.com<javaposse%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>

>>> <javaposse%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups .com>
>>> > > .
>>> > > For more options, visit this group at
>>> > >http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "The Java Posse" group.
>>> > To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
>>> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

>>> javaposse+...@googlegroups.com<javaposse%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>

>>> .
>>> > For more options, visit this group athttp://
>>> groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>>>
>>> --

>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "The Java Posse" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

>>> javaposse+...@googlegroups.com<javaposse%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>

>>> .
>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "The Java Posse" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

>> javaposse+...@googlegroups.com<javaposse%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>

>> .
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>>
>
>
>
> --

[Rakesh]

Jitesh,

"Intelligent Design" is a theory, created by Creationists to denounce Evolution.

I nominate this post to be the most pointless and ill-conceived in the
history of threads ever.

Rakesh

[Kevin Wright]

Bit of a typo on my part there, given that "intelligent design" isn't actually a theory (it must be at least disprovable to qualify as such)

But the point that we can't just "design" intelligence, and that it must be evolved.  Surely there's something very deep and metaphysical in that realization.

[Kevin Wright]

I thought the rule was you couldn't claim that until someone's been compared to Hitler and/or the Nazis

[Rakesh]

if computers gained sentience, they would be worse than the Nazis.

[Rakesh]

hey, this hijacking someone else's thread into a random direction is
fun! Sorry, I complained before.

[Kevin Wright]

So the uselessness of this conversation is now predicated on the ability of computers to achieve sentience?

[jitesh dundas]

Hahaha,

Really..That is quite an expression..

I am a Science student and I think science only..I welcome your
opinions Rakesh, that will bring some good pointers for us to
discuss..I don't believe I aimed at hijacking your thread.That thought
is so narrow-minded..In any case, please go ahead and say whatever
you want..You are most welcome...:)

Btw,thanks for the nominations,I guess I will be famous now..Only
now,I would like to learn more about science from what you say.

Again, your point about evolution and all..I stand by what I said. Anyways,
thanks for the constructive information.

I think computers could understand such a situation someday and if
they do, they do, t at will truly be human like thinking..

Thanks Kevin for your interesting reply.

Regards,
jd

[Kevin Wright]

What can I say, I'm a militant atheist.

I genuinely feel that acknowledging your atheism is the only wise choice.

After all, give me any person on the planet and I bet you I can find at least one deity they don't believe in.

So we're all atheists really of one kind or another, it's easier to just accept the fact :)

[Casper Bang]

Pardon me, but you sound like having been seduced by Kurzweil's
books... have you read any of his stuff?
What gives you such an optimistic outlook, considering researchers to
this day are still struggling with just understanding facets of the
human brain (why we need sleep, what is conscienceless, how can fobies
rule over rationale, why time appears to accelerate etc.)?

It's no more than 50 years ago doctors hammered ice picks into the
frontal lobe of patients in the belief that they could cure
psychological disorders. I'd consider simulated brains of today
equally crude; but hey, give me a tool that will do my job and I will
happily retire to my hammock with a cold brewski.

/Casper

- I program, therefore I am

On May 26, 7:23 pm, jitesh dundas <jbdun...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hahaha,
>
> Really..That is quite an expression..
>
> I am a Science student and I think science only..I welcome your
> opinions Rakesh, that will bring some good pointers for us to
> discuss..I don't believe I aimed at hijacking your thread.That thought
> is so narrow-minded..In any case, please go ahead  and say whatever
> you want..You are most welcome...:)
>
> Btw,thanks for the nominations,I guess I will be famous now..Only
> now,I would like to learn more about science from what you say.
>
> Again, your point about evolution and all..I stand by what I said. Anyways,
> thanks for the constructive information.
>
> I think computers could understand such a situation someday and if
> they do, they do, t at will truly be human like thinking..
>
> Thanks Kevin for your  interesting reply.
>
> Regards,
> jd
>

> On 5/26/10, Rakesh <rakesh.mailgro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > hey, this hijacking someone else's thread into a random direction is
> > fun! Sorry, I complained before.
>

> > On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 5:10 PM, Rakesh <rakesh.mailgro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> if computers gained sentience, they would be worse than the Nazis.
>
> >> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 5:07 PM, Kevin Wright
> >> <kev.lee.wri...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >>> I thought the rule was you couldn't claim that until someone's been
> >>> compared
> >>> to Hitler and/or the Nazis
>

> >>> On 26 May 2010 17:03, Rakesh <rakesh.mailgro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>> Jitesh,
>
> >>>> "Intelligent Design" is a theory, created by Creationists to denounce
> >>>> Evolution.
>
> >>>> I nominate this post to be the most pointless and ill-conceived in the
> >>>> history of threads ever.
>
> >>>> Rakesh
>

> >>>> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 4:55 PM, jitesh dundas <jbdun...@gmail.com>

> >>>> wrote:
> >>>> > Actually Kevin, this supports the intelligent design t
> >>>> > eory..Evolution is the next step in product of intelligent behavior.
>
> >>>> > No wonder computers are becoming smarter with our support.
> >>>> > However, evolution in computers will be the point when we can call
> >>>> > computers equal to us ...long way to go..lbut intelligence  & software
> >>>> > development ,well that should be not far away ....
>
> >>>> > I request replies in this direction...
>
> >>>> > Regards,
> >>>> > jd
>

> >>>> > On 5/25/10, Kevin Wright <kev.lee.wri...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >>>> >> So we can't just create these things, we have to evolve them.
>
> >>>> >> You know... this really screws with the "intelligent design" theory
> >>>> >> :)
>

> >>>> >> On 25 May 2010 14:50, shainnif ismail <shain...@googlemail.com>

> >>>> >> wrote:
>
> >>>> >>> well these machines do have 500,000 years of evolution to catch up
> >>>> >>> on,
> >>>> >>> the
> >>>> >>> analogy i recall was these system are like single cell organisms
> >>>> >>> that
> >>>> >>> we
> >>>> >>> need to force evolve.
>
> >>>> >>> Regards
> >>>> >>> Shaine Ismail
>

> >>>> >>>> > > javaposse+...@googlegroups.com<javaposse%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups .com>

> >>>> >>>> <javaposse%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups .com>
> >>>> >>>> > > .
> >>>> >>>> > > For more options, visit this group at
> >>>> >>>> > >http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>
> >>>> >>>> > --
> >>>> >>>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the
> >>>> >>>> > Google
> >>>> >>>> Groups "The Java Posse" group.
> >>>> >>>> > To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
> >>>> >>>> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>

> >>>> >>>> javaposse+...@googlegroups.com<javaposse%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups .com>
> >>>> >>>> .

> >>>> >>>> > For more options, visit this group athttp://
> >>>> >>>> groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>
> >>>> >>>> --
> >>>> >>>>  You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> >>>> >>>> Groups "The Java Posse" group.
> >>>> >>>> To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
> >>>> >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>

> >>>> >>>> javaposse+...@googlegroups.com<javaposse%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups .com>

> >>>> >>>> .
> >>>> >>>> For more options, visit this group at
> >>>> >>>>http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>
> >>>> >>>  --
> >>>> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> >>>> >>> Groups
> >>>> >>> "The Java Posse" group.
> >>>> >>> To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
> >>>> >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>

> >>>> >>> javaposse+...@googlegroups.com<javaposse%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups .com>

> >>>> >>> .
> >>>> >>> For more options, visit this group at
> >>>> >>>http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>
> >>>> >> --

> >>>> >> Kevin Wright
>
> >>>> >> mail/google talk: kev.lee.wri...@googlemail.com
> >>>> >> wave: kev.lee.wri...@googlewave.com

> >>> mail/google talk: kev.lee.wri...@googlemail.com
> >>> wave: kev.lee.wri...@googlewave.com

> >>> skype: kev.lee.wright
> >>> twitter: @thecoda
>
> >>> --
> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> >>> "The Java Posse" group.
> >>> To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
> >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> >>> javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.
> >>> For more options, visit this group at
> >>>http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "The Java Posse" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.
>

> ...
>
> read more »

[Fabrizio Giudici]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 5/26/10 18:13 , Kevin Wright wrote:
> So the uselessness of this conversation is now predicated on the
> ability of computers to achieve sentience?
>

It's true that this thread is one of the quirkiest, still it's amusing
and gives somes hint.
BTW, Jitesh, there's an email that you sent as a reply to my post, and
perhaps you sent only to me as I didn't see here on the list.

The point is interesting because, even though I think that Jitesh is
really too optimistic in his opinion about AI, he's forcing us to
define how "intelligent" has to do with software design. Indeed, there
are many kinds of "intelligence" for the humans and not all of them
are relevant to software development. But, generically speaking, the
word comes from the latin "intelligere" which means "to understand".
The whole point in software design is to describe with a formal
language a set of things to do. The thing has evolved through further
abstractions and today we're striving to have that formal language as
close as possible to the specifications (see TDD, BDD, DDD). Given
that, the fundamental ability for writing software is undertstanding
the customer needs - that is, it's a typical human and communication
skill. The greater chances for a project to fail in most cases aren't
related to technology, but to communications. Thus, an "intelligent
android" that wanted to develop software should really and completely
understand ("intelligere") the human language, together with context.
That is: either the android is intelligent as a human being, or it's
useless for software design. That's why emulating a rat's brain
doesn't impress me in this context.

- --
Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager
Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere."
java.net/blog/fabriziogiudici - www.tidalwave.it/people
Fabrizio...@tidalwave.it
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkv9b2sACgkQeDweFqgUGxdMpACfQTeI8qmUWJ2kLg086MKMBE70
ahQAn0sIWg4JhomNfEctPjFvLTIjVY6K
=dY7F
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[jitesh dundas]

Why do you think this way Rakesk? Atleat we can control robots. Can we
control humans including nazis.l

Before blaming robots(who are still yet to have human intelligence )
have you looked at the human perception.
If we get one right humanoid robot,it will help us solve so many issues.

I welcome human-like robots..it is us that we should be scared of.

Regards,
Jitesh Dundas

[jitesh dundas]

I agree with you Kevin, interesting point .....

Regards,
Jitesh Dundas

[Kevin Wright]

Is it even possible to define "human intelligence", given the variability of our species?

When I consider some of my past coworkers, all human (or close enough), I have to wonder if that's really the right direction to be taking AI...

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.

[jitesh dundas]

Thanks for your reply. However, I still think we can do it. Why do we
think that such inventions are impossible. I am just expressing that
we are on the road to success(when computers will have human like
brains)..Very ue, this is difficult. However,not impossible.

So I request you to look at the possibilities and not worry about the
bad sides..I am optimistic,yes but I am being realisticly
optimistic...We are on our way to achieving this. With so many
brilliant scientists working on this and so much money involved, there
is bound to be progress in this direction...

Regards,
Jitesh Dundas

[jitesh dundas]

You are right Kevin , but being able to solve problems faster than
normal average human abilities is enough to grade computers in this
direction of intelligence...
Regards,
Jitesh Dundas

On 5/27/10, Kevin Wright <kev.lee...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Is it even possible to define "human intelligence", given the variability of
> our species?
>
> When I consider some of my past coworkers, all human (or close enough), I
> have to wonder if that's really the right direction to be taking AI...
>
>
>
> On 26 May 2010 20:37, jitesh dundas <jbdu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Why do you think this way Rakesk? Atleat we can control robots. Can we
>> control humans including nazis.l
>>
>> Before blaming robots(who are still yet to have human intelligence )
>> have you looked at the human perception.
>> If we get one right humanoid robot,it will help us solve so many issues.
>>
>> I welcome human-like robots..it is us that we should be scared of.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Jitesh Dundas
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "The Java Posse" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

>> javaposse+...@googlegroups.com<javaposse%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>

[Fabrizio Giudici]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 5/26/10 21:50 , jitesh dundas wrote:
> Thanks for your reply. However, I still think we can do it. Why do
> we think that such inventions are impossible. I am just expressing
> that we are on the road to success(when computers will have human
> like brains)..Very ue, this is difficult. However,not impossible.
>
> So I request you to look at the possibilities and not worry about
> the bad sides..I am optimistic,yes but I am being realisticly
> optimistic...We are on our way to achieving this. With so many
> brilliant scientists working on this and so much money involved,
> there is bound to be progress in this direction...

What I really don't understand, Jitesh, is your purpose about
discussing the topic. In our exchanges, you attributed to me the
arguments "rat brains are simple" and "rat have not been made for
designing software" (in the mail that didn't get through the mailing
list). Now you talk about bad sides (I'm not sure if "you" refers to
me or generically to all the people here, as somebody talked about
"bad sides"). But the most common answer that you are getting here is
that the thing is extremely much more complex than you think and it
could be even impossible. We could be wrong, of course, and I'd like
to hear some counter-argument from you; but everything you
counter-answer is that you're optimistic and it can be surely done.
What's the point? :-) Such an attitude without arguments is more
suitable to marketing or politics, rather than science/technology.

- --
Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager
Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere."
java.net/blog/fabriziogiudici - www.tidalwave.it/people
Fabrizio...@tidalwave.it
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkv9f/0ACgkQeDweFqgUGxcyswCfQr/QOWlNoYbaW4QQWm6OFHab
00QAn1gtH1ZdUkpBuvULeZqkCLiWADcb
=kkpk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[jitesh dundas]

I am not saying this because I want to be a marketing/political
guy..That is the last thing to think off..l

I just look at the possibilities that we could achieve in the near
future. I hope you agree that we are moving in this direction.All
inventions/discoveries ,including computers were a dream far distant.

I am not overconfident but just simply optimistic.

Sentience is possible in humans due to sensory motions and
information communication mechanisms that work in sync with the brain.
Which are the ways in which we could understand the human brain so as
to make our computer achieve sentience..

Regards,
Jitesh Dundas

On 5/27/10, Fabrizio Giudici <fabrizio...@tidalwave.it> wrote:

[Casper Bang]

May I ask what kind of science are you studying?

On May 27, 4:23 am, jitesh dundas <jbdun...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am not saying this because I want to be a marketing/political
> guy..That is the last thing to think off..l
>
> I just look at the possibilities that we could achieve in the near
> future. I hope you agree that we are moving in this direction.All
> inventions/discoveries ,including computers were a dream far distant.
>
> I am not overconfident but just simply optimistic.
>
> Sentience is possible  in humans due to sensory motions and
> information communication mechanisms that work in sync with the brain.
> Which are the ways in which we could understand the human brain so as
> to make our computer achieve sentience..
>
> Regards,
> Jitesh Dundas
>

> > Fabrizio.Giud...@tidalwave.it

> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin)

> > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

[jitesh dundas]

I have just started studying computational neuroscience. I have
interests in this field .
Thank you for your replies. I hope we can brainstorm and get answers
to questions that we all think of as impossible at present .

Regards,
jd

[jitesh dundas]

This might give you some idea of things that are in process...

http://bluebrain.epfl.ch/page18699.html

http://www.icta.ufl.edu/projects/publications/Manuscript-HWRS-0820.pdf

http://sentientmachine.blogspot.com/2009_08_01_archive.html

http://rayne-vandunem.livejournal.com/144071.html

I think we are moving in this direction well on time before the next decade deadline..

Regards,
Jitesh Dundas