[LOCKSUIT]

Things are indeed false kor, like I Lock have never even once used a computer EVER. Yes, it's 'true'...I said it just now...I can even permanently store it if I try, if I want. But......the knowledge is BS. No good. And the generator aint supposed to be doing that all the time. It becomes good in a moment like this.

IOW, there's purposeful and purposeless knowledge, and true and false knowledge....there's also positive and negative knowledge I think...........we can save and speak and believe purposeless or false or negative things like fries on a dresser in arts room or i can fly or people die & i will put 5 needles in your eye run...

[LOCKSUIT]

continueing:

SO: We can save and rank up high no good knowledge like ones that are purposeless or never can/did happen, but, the nature of Good has it we end up coming to purposeful and can/did happened knowledge & ways since they bring Reward to you.

In the right time, you can see a match, where suddenly you take or generate something 'no good' and say it cus it brings reward for the time being.

[Korrelan]

Lock it's impossible to make any logical statement that's not true.  Using the common high level definition of true/ false any statement that makes logical sense is true... the keyword here is logical.

Ok... lets test it... show me a logical statement that's not true...

 

[LOCKSUIT]

Korrelan doesn't work on anything AI-related.

[LOCKSUIT]

Don't be scared to admit it korrelan that it is true.

[ivan.moony]

@Ivan

Any statement that makes ‘human logical sense’ is ultimately true.

It’s the level of abstraction combined with our definition of true/ false that causes the ambiguity… and one of the main reasons why I believe we can’t base an AGI on human derived logic.

It’s a catch 22, you can’t use a higher level concept (true/ false) to describe the workings of the intelligence that devised the concept.

 

It is not "human based logic", logic is something higher than that. We may consider logic as a form of Universe set of rules. I believe we can't find anything contradictory inside this Universe, just like we can't travel faster than speed of light.

But if we want to lie, we have to wrap it in a form that conforms rules of the Universe:

False -> ... write anything you want here, being truth or falsehood ...

But if we want to say a truth, we better watch what we are doing:

True -> ... write only non-contradictory set of statements here ...

It is a contradiction that's not allowed around. Contradiction simply doesn't exist at the lowest level. It can be only embedded in the above statement about falsehood. But are humans contradictory, that's another question. I believe that merely notion of existing is contradictory, so I supose this would apply:

False -> alive

Lock it's impossible to make any logical statement that's not true.  Using the common high level definition of true/ false any statement that makes logical sense is true... the keyword here is logical.

Ok... lets test it... show me a logical statement that's not true...

 

I'm not Lock, but if you would take my answer, here it is:

X & ~X

It is called a contradiction. However, the following is true:

(X & ~X) -> False

or, if you like it this way, it's the same truth:

~(X & ~X)

which, when we apply De Morgan's laws, becomes:

~X | X

which is by accident tautology (meaning it is true in all models, no matter if X alone is true or false)

[LOCKSUIT]

Put another way....everything we say or believe is all just particles.......................if we generate/say computers are awesome or trees are made of metal - we only do so because we get reward. It's all a reward pass-around thing.

[LOCKSUIT]

Same for saying "I am tall I am short, is false" or "I am tall I am short". Here we refute to say it cus cancel out or no reward, but we may because of reward.

[Korrelan]

logic is something higher than that.

Where did we humans find the laws of logic written down?

All the rules of logic are devised by humans; they are our interpretation of reality, based on human observations/ calculations and ultimately devised/ filtered by human minds.

just like we can't travel faster than speed of light.

The speed of light is the limit of our understanding/ observations, it may be a finite limit our it may not, how fast does quantum entanglement travel? Current estimates range up to 10,000 times faster than light.

We used to think humans would suffocate if we travelled faster than 40 mph, then came the locomotive to prove us wrong and we revised our thinking… my point being that we are still discovering/ learning.

As far as true/ false is concerned I was careful to always state that it must be a logical statement.  At the lowest level of abstraction if any logical statement makes any logical sense then it must be true/ a truth, otherwise what would be the point of the statement… it wouldn’t achieve/ calculate or represent anything meaningful.  The truth comes from the meaning/ usefulness of the calculation, does the logical statement make sense, yes or no… true or false.

Is it true it logically makes sense?... levels of abstraction.

 

[ivan.moony]

It is true that the whole science is subjective and relative to humans. It is an open question how would a science of another species (on this or another planet) look like.

 But as long as we can predict (or approximate) dynamics or statics of observed systems, that knowledge is more than welcome.

[Korrelan]

It is true that the whole science is subjective and relative to humans.

Indeed… don’t get me wrong I’m not saying that our logic doesn’t have its uses, obviously it does, we have been to the moon after all lol.

I just feel that a true AGI can’t be based on our logic, we can’t use a schema designed by an intelligent system to build a copy of the original intelligent system.

Plus humans/ intelligent systems use many different types of intelligence not just logic.  Visual intelligence for example, I’ve created a quick demo…



Note the answers are ‘logical’ and correct but no calculations were performed.

It is an open question how would a science of another species (on this or another planet) look like.

Again I agree, we are limited by our understanding and probably by our reality.  We can only perceive three spatial dimensions so all our ‘logic’ is grounded and indeed only makes any sense in our reality… but there could be more…



 

[ivan.moony]

Plus humans/ intelligent systems use many different types of intelligence not just logic.

All those types should be expressible (I hope) in Turing complete systems. And logic (at least, some forms if it) declares as a Turing complete system, just like Haskell, C++ and Assembler.

But can human mind and intelligence really be expressed in Turing complete system? Can the Universe be expressed in it? At least, which part of the Universe?

[LOCKSUIT]

Don't be fooled Art, everything is unique, at the same time, everything is related! This is where you gain power. Relations.

[Art]

Lock, my friend, I'm hardly fooled any longer. I used to do magic where everything I showed was both real (true) and deceptive (untrue/false) at the same time. So the statement that I did something false is still true even though my actions were false. Reality is often in the eye of the beholder.

OK...now that you've bombarded the board with all these posts and you've learned practically everything you need to know about LOGIC, how are you now going to implement this knowledge into your A.I. (chatbot/digital assistant/robot/AGI entity) and when?? Curious minds want to know.

Best wishes!

[LOCKSUIT]

Logic, LSTMs, and GANs are related. Logic uses premises, makes conclusions, and requires 'Validity' and 'Soundness'.