Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #701  
Old 01-19-2018, 06:55 AM
SamuelA is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tripler View Post
Well, I see he's basing his expert military opinion on avionics and human factors on video games (albeit a brief look). But now that I see an attempted pretext of cancer to sway an argument/make a point, I admit, that even in his "jest," I have never seen anything so yellow.
You didn't fucking read all 3 posts.

(a) the cancer one was sarcasm. Which anyone who reads can tell.

(b) I say "that's how it works in the video games, how does it actually work?"

(c) I point out that HOTAS at least replicates the actual menus from the actual jets. And those menus are garbage. If you are saying the actual jets are easier to fly than they are in the video games, speak up, asshole.

You know what. What you just shat out is so idiotic. So devoid of valid content. Every fucking one of your points above shows you failed high school english and should be in remedial reading. Are you fucking serious that you made it to a mid-level rank as an officer in the air force? You actually passed classes in college? How on earth?

Like, seriously? You say I'm arrogant. Maybe I deserve that. Condescending. Yep. Think I can know a better way than the ultimate outcome mother nature has for all of us, a rotting corpse. Yep. But at least I'm fucking trying. Fuck you, back to work in my real job.

Last edited by SamuelA; 01-19-2018 at 06:59 AM.
  #702  
Old 01-19-2018, 07:40 AM
JohnT's Avatar
JohnT is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 23,912
Ha! You didn't get ignored, Tripler!

Hey, child, anyone who jokes about having cancer is a shitstain.

And what is your real job again? Something, I'm positive, which is truly cutting edge, like vb.NET coding.

Last edited by JohnT; 01-19-2018 at 07:41 AM.
  #703  
Old 01-19-2018, 11:40 AM
Chimera is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Dreaming
Posts: 24,689
I bet he's a college kid with no job except maybe one of those lazy assed "I'll work at Starbucks 6 hours a week for the employee discount, then cancel half my shifts" kind of people.

About 15 years ago my sister took over management of a chain coffee store near a "Christian" college. She found that she had 60 kids on her list of employees who all worked less than 10 hours a week and most of them routinely called in sick to get out of their shifts. She set the rule at a minimum of 10 hours a week and fired everyone who worked less than that, or regularly called in sick. Because a lot of them would call in sick, then appear several hours later looking perfectly healthy to use their employee discount. Idiots.
  #704  
Old 01-19-2018, 12:25 PM
Tripler is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: JSOTF SDMB, OL-LANL
Posts: 7,317
And he comes out swinging! I do enjoy watching him flounder in his own lack of logic. . . So, here we go.

--

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
You didn't fucking read all 3 posts.
You didn't count correctly. There are only two that we're dealing with in my last post. Where's the magical third one?

But on a side note, we have ALL read your posts. We're not laughing with you, we're laughing at you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
(a) the cancer one was sarcasm. Which anyone who reads can tell.
Yes, I did tell it was sarcasm--and indicated that. And I also indicated that anyone who sarcastically uses cancer to make a point is yellow.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
(b) I say "that's how it works in the video games, how does it actually work?"
Those words never appear in your post. That concept never appears in your post. You don't even address 'how things work'; you simply used your video game experience as a segue into how to unnecessarily automate things.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
(c) I point out that HOTAS at least replicates the actual menus from the actual jets. And those menus are garbage.
No you don't. That concept never appears in your post. But here's a concept for you: what flops into your mind doesn't correspond to what you type and make appear on our screens.. Your fantastical ideas are truly your own, you special snowflake! But please do inform us on how HOTAS hardware can mimic a graphical interface. Feel free . . .

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
If you are saying the actual jets are easier to fly than they are in the video games, speak up, asshole.
With graduation from SUPT and/or ENJJPT, and further training in their specific airfrmes and positions (e.g. Flight Engineer, Radar/Nav, etc.) it becomes easier to fly and muscle memory is developed. With proper training, it is easier to fly an aircraft than your unqualified, unsolicited opinion offers. But you wouldn't know that because you play video games instead of having any semblance of first-person information (i.e. talking with people that have actually performed these tasks).

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
You know what. What you just shat out is so idiotic. So devoid of valid content. Every fucking one of your points above shows you failed high school english and should be in remedial reading. Are you fucking serious that you made it to a mid-level rank as an officer in the air force? You actually passed classes in college? How on earth?
Spoken like a true 6-year old that's been caught with his pants down. If anyone needs remedial English, it's yourself--you seem to mentally attach internal ideas, thoughts, and fantasies to typed words that don't convey those concepts. Even in basic debates, you have demonstrated a pattern to introduce ideas without citations or justifications, only to provide weak evidence after the fact that you've been called out. And this is where you fail, and where we point out your fantasies. I do think you need to go back to Summer School to learn to count though.


Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
Like, seriously? You say I'm arrogant. Maybe I deserve that. Condescending. Yep.
You forgot "lofty, head-in-the-clouds academic" and "amateur at best." But, I'll take your current admissions as evidence that learning can be/has been achieved.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
Think I can know a better way than the ultimate outcome mother nature has for all of us, a rotting corpse. Yep. But at least I'm fucking trying. Fuck you, back to work in my real job.
Oh, nobody's questioning the fact you think you know better than the rest of us. But we do question what substance you may be partaking in to motivate you to tackle such currently-impossible task. You must be the Enlightened One! Compared to you, all I can do is scrape by with more prescient earthly problems like, maintaining a nuclear weapons system in a politcially questionable environment between two national-level leaders. But if you can solve the question of immortality--go for it! The rest of us will keep us alive until you come up with that perfect solution. I doubt we can keep you alive to the point you find such a high-order goal.

--

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnT View Post
And what is your real job again? Something, I'm positive, which is truly cutting edge, like vb.NET coding.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimera View Post
I bet he's a college kid with no job except maybe one of those lazy assed "I'll work at Starbucks 6 hours a week for the employee discount, then cancel half my shifts" kind of people.
According to this he was working for his father as a computer programmer until he took an internship, and moved into an apartment with roomates (back in May). He claimed he was taking some online Masters' Courses through Georgia Tech too, and has obviously read a lot which apparently furthers his worldly expertise in a variety of subjects. At some point between May and October, there was some sort of mental breakdown, where he went from somewhat coherent to downright obnoxiously arrogant.

Tripler
I do enjoy watching him flounder.

Last edited by Tripler; 01-19-2018 at 12:28 PM.
  #705  
Old 01-19-2018, 12:29 PM
Darren Garrison's Avatar
Darren Garrison is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 12,035
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimera View Post
I bet he's a college kid with no job except maybe one of those lazy assed "I'll work at Starbucks 6 hours a week for the employee discount, then cancel half my shifts" kind of people.
See this thread.

(ETA culturally-appropriated sneaky Asian assassined by Tripler.)

Last edited by Darren Garrison; 01-19-2018 at 12:30 PM.
  #706  
Old 01-19-2018, 12:32 PM
Skywatcher's Avatar
Skywatcher is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Somewhere in the Potomac
Posts: 35,421
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tripler View Post
He ... has obviously read a lot which apparently furthers his worldly expertise in a variety of subjects.
That only works in Holiday Inn Express commercials.

Last edited by Skywatcher; 01-19-2018 at 12:33 PM.
  #707  
Old 01-19-2018, 08:49 PM
Tripler is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: JSOTF SDMB, OL-LANL
Posts: 7,317
Our boy wonder last logged in at 5:12PM MST. No doubt he's stewing and writing an "epic, scathing response" full of wonder and logic.

Tripler
It's entertaining watching him flounder.
  #708  
Old 01-19-2018, 08:54 PM
Morgenstern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 11,866
Oh, not so. Sammy has used this time on reflect on how he's coming across and he's decided to turn over a new leaf. He's going to come back and admit he was wrong and thank everyone for helping him learn to better get along.
Then he'll offer to go to some homeless center and do 100 hours of community service to make amends.
Have faith in Sammy. This will happen.
  #709  
Old 01-19-2018, 09:23 PM
SamuelA is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tripler View Post
Our boy wonder last logged in at 5:12PM MST. No doubt he's stewing and writing an "epic, scathing response" full of wonder and logic.

Tripler
It's entertaining watching him flounder.
No, I'm just not interesting in engaging with someone who isn't intellectually honest or intelligent enough to be worth my time. Come post on LesserWrong if you want to engage with me. The moderation there is brutal, you wouldn't even get out of the negatives.
  #710  
Old 01-19-2018, 09:33 PM
Morgenstern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 11,866
What's your username over there?
  #711  
Old 01-20-2018, 10:31 AM
Tripler is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: JSOTF SDMB, OL-LANL
Posts: 7,317
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
No, I'm just not interesting in engaging with someone who isn't intellectually honest or intelligent enough to be worth my time.
Spoken like a true narcissist.

"Intellectual honesty" and "intelligence" has nothing to do with it. Here's what really happened; your ego moved you to wander into territory you know nothing about. When you did, and someone knowledgeable in that field came to challenge you with the difficult quesitons on your theories (on two subjects now), you threw your hands up and became "disinterested." You tried to baffle us with bullshit, irrelevant equations, fantasies, and half-assed citations but were called out--and then you "lost interest." If this is how you plan on defending a Graduate Capstone Project, then prepare to fail miserably.


Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
Come post on LesserWrong if you want to engage with me. The moderation there is brutal, you wouldn't even get out of the negatives.
What makes you think I'm not already there? . . . and why do you want to retreat to your "safe space," so the mods can protect you?

Seriously kid, if you can't handle heat, get out of your Mother's kitchen.

Tripler
I recommend you microwave your meatloaf--it's safer than you around a stove.
  #712  
Old 01-20-2018, 01:34 PM
Morgenstern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 11,866
Well, in all honesty, meatloaf cooked on a stove sucks. I prefer a conduction oven because I can't afford a convection oven, but I have a plan to market convection ovens to the masses. If you reverse the polarity of an conduction oven, and add a resister over by the recoineter valve, between the polar splits, you can make a pretty fair modification to your oven. It will no longer require electricity either. Just sit it in the sun on a hot day and it'll cook fine.

Last edited by Morgenstern; 01-20-2018 at 01:35 PM.
  #713  
Old 01-20-2018, 03:00 PM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 11,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morgenstern View Post
Well, in all honesty, meatloaf cooked on a stove sucks. I prefer a conduction oven because I can't afford a convection oven, but I have a plan to market convection ovens to the masses. If you reverse the polarity of an conduction oven, and add a resister over by the recoineter valve, between the polar splits, you can make a pretty fair modification to your oven. It will no longer require electricity either. Just sit it in the sun on a hot day and it'll cook fine.
In a pinch, you can use it to deflect asteroids.

When you're sick, hop on in, and it'll freeze you until they find a cure to what ails you.

*Nano-bots not included.
  #714  
Old 01-20-2018, 05:37 PM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 11,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
No, I'm just not interesting in engaging with someone who isn't intellectually honest or intelligent enough to be worth my time. Come post on LesserWrong if you want to engage with me. The moderation there is brutal, you wouldn't even get out of the negatives.
Every time I start to feel a twinge of sympathy for this witless schlemiel, he suddenly reappears like an odiferous anal emission to remind us all why he deserves everything he's getting.
  #715  
Old 01-20-2018, 07:33 PM
outlierrn is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: republic of california
Posts: 5,745
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
Anyways, I've made my points. You're all morons, except for those individuals I have named who are not. I'm done with my victory lap, I win all the arguments, tossing my guitar to the groupies in front and I'm heading backstage.
Here's a pro tip; if you're the only one cheering on your victory lap, you didn't win all the arguments.
__________________
Just another outlying data point on the bell curve of life
  #716  
Old 01-21-2018, 11:48 AM
Paranoid Randroid's Avatar
Paranoid Randroid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Dayton, OH
Posts: 1,954
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
Come post on LesserWrong if you want to engage with me.

LesserWrong? Is that a site dedicated to stuff like jaywalking and eating the last piece of cake?
  #717  
Old 01-21-2018, 02:11 PM
JohnT's Avatar
JohnT is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 23,912
What I'm trying to figure out is the challenge itself.

Tripler goes to LW to debate SA. They say the same things they say here.

OK? And that proves... what?
  #718  
Old 01-21-2018, 02:27 PM
Chimera is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Dreaming
Posts: 24,689
Perhaps whiny boy thinks that people over there will white knight him.
  #719  
Old 01-21-2018, 02:29 PM
TroutMan's Avatar
TroutMan is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 5,042
In Sammy's fantasies, the denizens of the other site congratulate him on his brilliant knowledge and arguments, Tripler slinks back defeated, and Sam gets an actual victory lap where he isn't the only one cheering.

The reality would be there are now two forums that consider Sammy an idiot, which means he has twice as many people to feel superior to. A win either way!
  #720  
Old 01-21-2018, 03:42 PM
JohnT's Avatar
JohnT is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 23,912
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paranoid Randroid View Post
LesserWrong? Is that a site dedicated to stuff like jaywalking and eating the last piece of cake?
I have been informed by my wife that eating the last piece of cake in her house is, in no way, a lesser wrong.
  #721  
Old 01-21-2018, 04:20 PM
Darren Garrison's Avatar
Darren Garrison is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 12,035
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paranoid Randroid View Post
LesserWrong? Is that a site dedicated to stuff like jaywalking and eating the last piece of cake?
It looks to be a site where everyone is SamuelA.
  #722  
Old 01-21-2018, 04:56 PM
Mr. Nylock is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Bed
Posts: 3,093
I wish I could go back to believing I knew things about things. Nowadays I just wallow in a bath of my own ignorance, and steak. I like steak, but sometimes I envy the likes of SamuelA.
__________________
I am a guest
  #723  
Old 01-21-2018, 10:45 PM
Tripler is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: JSOTF SDMB, OL-LANL
Posts: 7,317
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnT View Post
What I'm trying to figure out is the challenge itself.

Tripler goes to LW to debate SA. They say the same things they say here.

OK? And that proves... what?
It would be more of the same. SamuelA making fantastical claims with no/late citations, ad nauseum. I don't know what he expects to gain out of it except the fact he may have some moderators in his pocket, or be a moderator himself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darren Garrison View Post
It looks to be a site where everyone is SamuelA.
There's a lot of that going on there. Some intelligent discussion but the most of what I've seen is speculation on AI.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Nylock View Post
I wish I could go back to believing I knew things about things. Nowadays I just wallow in a bath of my own ignorance, and steak. I like steak, but sometimes I envy the likes of SamuelA.
You bathe in steak?!?? Man, I want to live at your house. Can I come over? I'll bring A-1 and Worcestershire.

Tripler
I'm totally paleo. Totally.

Last edited by Tripler; 01-21-2018 at 10:47 PM.
  #724  
Old 01-21-2018, 10:50 PM
Mr. Nylock is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Bed
Posts: 3,093
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tripler View Post
There's a lot of that going on there. Some intelligent discussion but the most of what I've seen is speculation on AI.



You bathe in steak?!?? Man, I want to live at your house. Can I come over? I'll bring A-1 and Worcestershire.

Tripler
I'm totally paleo. Totally.
Steak is more of a metaphor for ethereal meatiness that surrounds me while I wallow in my own ignorance.

A-1 and worcestershire? You steak at whole nother level man. Respect.
__________________
I am a guest

Last edited by Mr. Nylock; 01-21-2018 at 10:50 PM.
  #725  
Old 01-21-2018, 11:10 PM
Chimera is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Dreaming
Posts: 24,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darren Garrison View Post
It looks to be a site where everyone is SamuelA.
I read that an hour ago, just paused, opened my mouth and shook my head. My brain contemplated the idea for like 0.25 seconds and then said "No. Just, no. You can't make me try to imagine that."
  #726  
Old 01-22-2018, 01:06 PM
SamuelA is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimera View Post
I read that an hour ago, just paused, opened my mouth and shook my head. My brain contemplated the idea for like 0.25 seconds and then said "No. Just, no. You can't make me try to imagine that."
What'll really bake your noodle is that if our theories are correct, and we have reasons to think they are, then all the world will eventually converge onto these ideas.

Aumann's agreement theorem says that two people acting rationally (in a certain precise sense) and with common knowledge of each other's beliefs cannot agree to disagree. More specifically, if two people are genuine Bayesian rationalists with common priors, and if they each have common knowledge of their individual posterior probabilities, then their posteriors must be equal.

Once every sentient being is an AI or a human converted to a computer and has sufficient processing power, we will all have the same common set of data about the world and the adequate cognitive ability to converge on the same conclusions. In the more immediate future, we're mere years away from limited function data analysis tools that can augment human intelligence and thus produce the correct conclusions given the data.

I consider it a higher probability that "our" (me and the other members of the site) current analysis is closer to the one true correct analysis that "your" (you mentally challenged individuals in this thread) analysis. It's just a guess...but a rational one.

Last edited by SamuelA; 01-22-2018 at 01:09 PM.
  #727  
Old 01-22-2018, 01:37 PM
Ludovic is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: America's Wing
Posts: 30,579
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Nylock View Post
A-1 and worcestershire? You steak at whole nother level man. Respect.
When I make steak sometimes I put worcestershire on it while it is cooking to add to the flavor, then dab A1 sauce on it while eating because while they both taste just as good, the worcestershire doesn't stay on.
  #728  
Old 01-22-2018, 02:16 PM
Morgenstern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 11,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
What'll really bake your noodle is that if our theories are correct, and we have reasons to think they are, then all the world will eventually converge onto these ideas.

Aumann's agreement theorem says that two people acting rationally (in a certain precise sense) and with common knowledge of each other's beliefs cannot agree to disagree. More specifically, if two people are genuine Bayesian rationalists with common priors, and if they each have common knowledge of their individual posterior probabilities, then their posteriors must be equal.

Once every sentient being is an AI or a human converted to a computer and has sufficient processing power, we will all have the same common set of data about the world and the adequate cognitive ability to converge on the same conclusions. In the more immediate future, we're mere years away from limited function data analysis tools that can augment human intelligence and thus produce the correct conclusions given the data.

I consider it a higher probability that "our" (me and the other members of the site) current analysis is closer to the one true correct analysis that "your" (you mentally challenged individuals in this thread) analysis. It's just a guess...but a rational one.

Mensa called, they said you're way too fucking stupid for admission. Sorry to burst your bubble.
  #729  
Old 01-22-2018, 02:39 PM
Chimera is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Dreaming
Posts: 24,689
"Well this guy says this, so it has to be true and apply to everything"

Ah, the zeal of the new convert. Believing everything said is the truth and wielding it as a cudgel against everything in their world.

He needs to be on some kind of watch list, against the event that he decides to study politics or religion. He's like one ideological molecule away from being a militant fanatic.
  #730  
Old 01-22-2018, 03:34 PM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 11,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
Aumann's agreement theorem says that two people acting rationally (in a certain precise sense) and with common knowledge of each other's beliefs cannot agree to disagree. More specifically, if two people are genuine Bayesian rationalists with common priors, and if they each have common knowledge of their individual posterior probabilities, then their posteriors must be equal.

Once every sentient being is an AI or a human converted to a computer and has sufficient processing power, we will all have the same common set of data about the world and the adequate cognitive ability to converge on the same conclusions. In the more immediate future, we're mere years away from limited function data analysis tools that can augment human intelligence and thus produce the correct conclusions given the data.

I consider it a higher probability that "our" (me and the other members of the site) current analysis is closer to the one true correct analysis that "your" (you mentally challenged individuals in this thread) analysis. It's just a guess...but a rational one.


I know there are many fans of SamuelA in this thread (for a precise and ironic sense of the word "fans" ) so herewith an appreciation and tribute to the brilliance of SamuelA.

My first question would be what the fuck on God's green earth this has to do with anything that was being discussed, but never mind. SamuelA is on a roll, so let's take a look, because it's always fun.

We know from previous experience that SamuelA likes to plagiarize things out of Wikipedia and pass it off as his own, as he did with the definition of "computation", and, significantly, to do it without understanding it. He no doubt got the idea for this off-the-wall irrelevant grandstanding out of "LessWrong" because this is the kind of stuff they bloviate about, and thought he would pass off a cribbed Wikipedia entry here as a shining example of ... something. But what? His ability to cut and paste? His shameless plagiarizing?

Moreover, the substance of the "theorem" is pretty unenlightening because if one accepts the artificially constrained technical premises as precisely defined, then the theorem is self-evidently and trivially true. As the author himself stated, "We publish this paper with some diffidence, since once one has the appropriate framework, it is mathematically trivial." Or as Rational Wiki astutely opines, "Aumann's agreement theorem is the result of Nobel laureate Robert Aumann's groundbreaking 1976 discovery that a sufficiently respected game theorist can get anything into a peer-reviewed journal."

The problem, of course, is the presumption that everyone has access to the same perfect information and possesses the same perfect rationality, and implicitly has the same history and the same goals and values. It necessarily presumes that we have ceased to have any identity either as individuals or collectively as groups and have become identical machines, a perfectly plausible scenario in SamuelA's demented imaginary world, ignoring the fact that this is tantamount to saying we will have ceased to exist.

As Rational Wiki points out here, at its core this is nothing more than the truism that two calculators will give you the same answer to the same input. This is something that SamuelA can appreciate because I understand that he took (and passed!) a signals course, plus he knows how the brain works (it executes branch instructions!). In the real world -- the one that SamuelA has great difficulties with -- people have, and will always have, identities, goals, values, and self-interests. This is why we have politics and why different rational people come to entirely different conclusions based on exactly the same facts.

All this brilliance was apparently dredged out of the anal sphincter of LessWrong and seems to have impressed the beejesus out of SamuelA. Not surprisingly, Rational Wiki has a few choice words about them, too: "... very focused on an evil future artificial intelligence taking over the world. Some compare it to a circle-jerk of wordiness" and "... the community's focused demographic and narrow interests have also produced an insular culture that is heavy with its own peculiar jargon and established ideas that often conflict with science and reality." If they also celebrate cut-n-paste plagiarists and pompous bloviating blowhards, it will be the perfect place for our SamuelA and we wish him well, if only he would kindly bugger off and go there and become an imaginary hero in his own mind. We will miss the humor, but c'est la vie.

SamuelA, you embarrass yourself every time you post. Even your fantasies are epic fails.
  #731  
Old 01-22-2018, 07:50 PM
Tripler is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: JSOTF SDMB, OL-LANL
Posts: 7,317
This reply is going to quote SamuelA out of order, because I actually do want to give him a chance to defend his postulates in an academic conversation. I do the following with a calm voice and from a rational mindset; but please consider me a skeptic that could be "sold" on this idea. That being said. . .

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
Once every sentient being is an AI or a human converted to a computer and has sufficient processing power, we will all have the same common set of data about the world and the adequate cognitive ability to converge on the same conclusions. In the more immediate future, we're mere years away from limited function data analysis tools that can augment human intelligence and thus produce the correct conclusions given the data.
Some initial questions:
1. Can you define how you plan to convert every sentient being into 'an AI' or a computer? What type of technology will this entail? Hardware? What software or 'mental reconditioning' will be required to connect everyone to this system?
2. Will people be allowed to choose--say 'opt in' to this construct, or will this be a requirement? At what point in their lives (say . . . a particular age) will they be converted? Will humans have the choice to 'opt out' and reverse this conversion?
3. Where will this common set of data be hosted? Who will collect and maintain this data? What safeguards will be in place to prevent corruption of this data and this collective cognitive ability from, say corporate interests or foreign agents?
4. Will those connected to this sytem still retain their individuality? What if they choose to pursue other interests or other problems?
5. What resources will this system require? Will this sytem prolong life? What resources will be required to maintain the 'meatspace' element of the system (ties into #1 with the hardware element. . .) Who/what organization will manage this system?

Can you link to this discussion on your other forum?

---- Now a break to address the earlier comments.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
I consider it a higher probability that "our" (me and the other members of the site) current analysis is closer to the one true correct analysis that "your" (you mentally challenged individuals in this thread) analysis. It's just a guess...but a rational one.
This is not helpful on "selling" your idea.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
What'll really bake your noodle is that if our theories are correct, and we have reasons to think they are, then all the world will eventually converge onto these ideas.
Is this stated in that discussion, or is this a personal opinion?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
Aumann's agreement theorem says that two people acting rationally (in a certain precise sense) and with common knowledge of each other's beliefs cannot agree to disagree. More specifically, if two people are genuine Bayesian rationalists with common priors, and if they each have common knowledge of their individual posterior probabilities, then their posteriors must be equal.
Can you link to Aumann's theorem so I can read more about it?

Tripler
SamuelA, the floor is yours.
  #732  
Old 01-22-2018, 09:37 PM
Darren Garrison's Avatar
Darren Garrison is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 12,035
And every knee shall bow, every tounge confess, that the singularity is lord!
  #733  
Old 01-22-2018, 09:58 PM
Andy L is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 6,849
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tripler View Post

Can you link to Aumann's theorem so I can read more about it?

Tripler
SamuelA, the floor is yours.
Here's the original paper http://www.ma.huji.ac.il/~raumann/pd...20Disagree.pdf

It's pretty interesting, actually. I'm not sure that in practice any two people have the same priors, and note that the paper does not estimate how long it will take for posteriors to converge (there may be later papers that deal with both these issues).
  #734  
Old 01-22-2018, 10:17 PM
Darren Garrison's Avatar
Darren Garrison is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 12,035
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy L View Post
the paper does not estimate how long it will take for posteriors to converge (there may be later papers that deal with both these issues).
I believe that topic is covered in the documentary Requiem For a Dream.

Last edited by Darren Garrison; 01-22-2018 at 10:18 PM.
  #735  
Old 01-23-2018, 09:02 PM
Tripler is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: JSOTF SDMB, OL-LANL
Posts: 7,317
I'm throwing SamuelA an olive branch here. I see he's been online, but I'd hope to get some more details from him.

Tripler
No tricks.
  #736  
Old 01-24-2018, 12:44 PM
74westy's Avatar
74westy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Regina, SK, Canada
Posts: 2,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by darren garrison View Post
i believe that topic is covered in the documentary requiem for a dream.
ASS TA ASS!
and some lowercase text
__________________
Fahren nur mit geschlossenem dach !
  #737  
Old 01-25-2018, 12:16 AM
SamuelA is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tripler View Post
I'm throwing SamuelA an olive branch here. I see he's been online, but I'd hope to get some more details from him.

Tripler
No tricks.
Then why claim to ignore me and say you don't care as loudly and repeatedly as possible?

You know I don't claim to know the answer to your question because I don't know the way the future will go. Ultimately all that theorem really means in this context, as wolfpup points out :

a. Physical reality is a game with fixed rules. Like all games, one and only one optimal strategy exists, given the same end goal.

b. As smarter beings begin to replace humans - whether that be AIs, cyborgs, genetically engineered humans, it doesn't matter - those beings will have the neural ability to follow more optimal strategies. I know what I am doing now is not optimal, but my cave man emotions won't let me do what I know is better. (hence I don't have a 6-pack, 5 girlfriends, and a job as a quant making 500k a year, even though there exists a sequence of actions I could have logically worked out and taken to get there if I were an inhuman, rational agent)

c. Smarter beings will also have vastly more memory capacity and ability to share data with each other digitally.

Hence, if beings can share data with each other digitally, and analyze it using the most optimal strategy they know about in common, they will reach the same conclusion. In the same way that 2 calculators agree with each other as wolfpup points out.

Part of the reason this idea has impressed me is that religion, politics, personal lifestyle choices - they are all strategies to accomplish goals. Given the same goals and knowledge of the optimal strategy, rational beings wouldn't have 5000 opinions for religion/politics/personal choices. A correct answer (where correct means "most probable strategy to accomplish your goals) exists for each of these "taboo" topics.

If you encountered another being with a different opinion, you could just plug your serial ports together or whatever and swap memory files. You would literally be able to work out mathematically why that being's opinion is different. Maybe one of you is unaware of the most optimal strategy - you could share it with the other, they could run that strategy on their experiences, determine it has a higher expected value, and switch over.

Last edited by SamuelA; 01-25-2018 at 12:19 AM.
  #738  
Old 01-25-2018, 12:26 AM
Crazyhorse's Avatar
Crazyhorse is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,285
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
Aumann's agreement theorem says that two people acting rationally (in a certain precise sense) and with common knowledge of each other's beliefs cannot agree to disagree. More specifically, if two people are genuine Bayesian rationalists with common priors, and if they each have common knowledge of their individual posterior probabilities, then their posteriors must be equal.
The exception that proves the rule: Crazyhorse's troll theorem says that your posterior will always have the higher probability of your head being stuck in it.
  #739  
Old 01-25-2018, 12:35 AM
raventhief's Avatar
raventhief is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,083
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
Then why claim to ignore me and say you don't care as loudly and repeatedly as possible?

You know I don't claim to know the answer to your question because I don't know the way the future will go. Ultimately all that theorem really means in this context, as wolfpup points out :

a. Physical reality is a game with fixed rules. Like all games, one and only one optimal strategy exists, given the same end goal.

b. As smarter beings begin to replace humans - whether that be AIs, cyborgs, genetically engineered humans, it doesn't matter - those beings will have the neural ability to follow more optimal strategies. I know what I am doing now is not optimal, but my cave man emotions won't let me do what I know is better. (hence I don't have a 6-pack, 5 girlfriends, and a job as a quant making 500k a year, even though there exists a sequence of actions I could have logically worked out and taken to get there if I were an inhuman, rational agent)

c. Smarter beings will also have vastly more memory capacity and ability to share data with each other digitally.

Hence, if beings can share data with each other digitally, and analyze it using the most optimal strategy they know about in common, they will reach the same conclusion. In the same way that 2 calculators agree with each other as wolfpup points out.

Part of the reason this idea has impressed me is that religion, politics, personal lifestyle choices - they are all strategies to accomplish goals. Given the same goals and knowledge of the optimal strategy, rational beings wouldn't have 5000 opinions for religion/politics/personal choices. A correct answer (where correct means "most probable strategy to accomplish your goals) exists for each of these "taboo" topics.

If you encountered another being with a different opinion, you could just plug your serial ports together or whatever and swap memory files. You would literally be able to work out mathematically why that being's opinion is different. Maybe one of you is unaware of the most optimal strategy - you could share it with the other, they could run that strategy on their experiences, determine it has a higher expected value, and switch over.
Why is the same end goal a given?
  #740  
Old 01-25-2018, 06:23 AM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 11,231
It appears that it's not only on the subject of technology that SamuelA can provide novel and illuminating insights. Here he holds forth in an excellent new treatise on the subjects of immigration, race, and Making America Great Again™. Here we have one of the great minds of the day addressing one of the truly challenging issues of our times. You can read it starting with post #73 on page 2 of this thread. I cannot hope that my humble summary will do it justice, but I've tried to convey the essence of it. For the sake of brevity, I've cut to the chase of what he's really saying and not bothered with the dog whistles.

America became successful because it was settled by the superior Aryan race, white northern Europeans. There wasn't much in the way of formal immigration criteria prior to the 1920s, but that was OK because only decent white Europeans could afford to come here, so it all worked out. And after that it was biased by race and ethnicity with favoritism toward exactly the right kind of white northern Europeans, which was great! Oh, sure, in the 19th century a bunch of Chinese started coming in, but the 19th century was great because the rules worked pretty much according to the rules of SamuelA: laws were soon passed putting a stop to that sort of thing, see? So that worked out OK, too, when we kicked their little yellow oriental butts and made it clear they weren't welcome.

Now inferior races from shithole countries want to come in -- most of them even worse than Chinese -- and this must be stopped. Don't bother about their qualifications, just look at the shitholes they live in! It's not that SamuelA is racist or anything -- heaven forfend! -- this is just Aumann's theorem of rationality as expressed by SamuelA's posterior. We know he's not racist because he tells us many times, just like he tells us that he's absolutely right about computation and how the brain works. It's so obvious that he's right about all these things that you'd have to be an idiot not to see it. We assume that he totally loves inferior races from shithole countries, as long as they stay in their shithole countries and don't mess up the ones that decent people live in. Did I mention that SamuelA is not a racist? Yes, I did, but you can never say it too often. He's so incredibly non-racist that he probably even starts a lot of dinner-table conversations with comments like, "I'm not a racist, but ...".
  #741  
Old 01-25-2018, 10:08 AM
TroutMan's Avatar
TroutMan is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 5,042
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfpup View Post
He's so incredibly non-racist that he probably even starts a lot of dinner-table conversations with comments like, "I'm not a racist, but ...".
I bet he even has a black friend.
  #742  
Old 01-25-2018, 10:50 AM
SamuelA is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfpup View Post
It appears that it's not only on the subject of technology that SamuelA can provide novel and illuminating insights. Here he holds forth in an excellent new treatise on the subjects of immigration, race, and Making America Great Again™. Here we have one of the great minds of the day addressing one of the truly challenging issues of our times. You can read it starting with post #73 on page 2 of this thread. I cannot hope that my humble summary will do it justice, but I've tried to convey the essence of it. For the sake of brevity, I've cut to the chase of what he's really saying and not bothered with the dog whistles.

America became successful because it was settled by the superior Aryan race, white northern Europeans. There wasn't much in the way of formal immigration criteria prior to the 1920s, but that was OK because only decent white Europeans could afford to come here, so it all worked out. And after that it was biased by race and ethnicity with favoritism toward exactly the right kind of white northern Europeans, which was great! Oh, sure, in the 19th century a bunch of Chinese started coming in, but the 19th century was great because the rules worked pretty much according to the rules of SamuelA: laws were soon passed putting a stop to that sort of thing, see? So that worked out OK, too, when we kicked their little yellow oriental butts and made it clear they weren't welcome.

Now inferior races from shithole countries want to come in -- most of them even worse than Chinese -- and this must be stopped. Don't bother about their qualifications, just look at the shitholes they live in! It's not that SamuelA is racist or anything -- heaven forfend! -- this is just Aumann's theorem of rationality as expressed by SamuelA's posterior. We know he's not racist because he tells us many times, just like he tells us that he's absolutely right about computation and how the brain works. It's so obvious that he's right about all these things that you'd have to be an idiot not to see it. We assume that he totally loves inferior races from shithole countries, as long as they stay in their shithole countries and don't mess up the ones that decent people live in. Did I mention that SamuelA is not a racist? Yes, I did, but you can never say it too often. He's so incredibly non-racist that he probably even starts a lot of dinner-table conversations with comments like, "I'm not a racist, but ...".
This is why you're on ignore. You are massively mis-characterizing what I wrote.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
a. The facts are, our ancestors didn't in reality let just anyone in pre-1920. I don't know where the 12 million Chinese workers went, they aren't there in the census data.

b. Some people are probably better than others as individuals, regardless of race. We should go by merit instead of having just "no limits, anyone and everyone".
So no, you're full of shit. I said things to this effect several times. You can't fucking claim a massively different strategy than the one used in the past is going to work just as well. For some reason, letting in 84% Europeans and another group involuntarily worked. Those are the facts. You're a fucking racist yourself if you see no other explanation than "europeans are superior".

And I don't propose going back to the old strategy, which is a valid thing to do. Doing what worked before in the past has a higher probability of working than just picking a random strategy. I propose using our shiny new computers that can compute approximate probabilities from data and to pick the right citizens by a model that factors in their probability of success.

Last edited by SamuelA; 01-25-2018 at 10:52 AM.
  #743  
Old 01-25-2018, 10:51 AM
crowmanyclouds's Avatar
crowmanyclouds is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: ... hiding in my room ...
Posts: 4,763
Quote:
Originally Posted by TroutMan View Post
I bet he even has a black friend.
Does the detached head in his freezer count as a friend?

CMC fnord!
  #744  
Old 01-25-2018, 11:09 AM
SamuelA is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by crowmanyclouds View Post
Does the detached head in his freezer count as a friend?

CMC fnord!
C'mon, don't mis-characterize me. Everyone knows you can't store human brains in a regular freezer, and you'd be frankly irresponsible to store one at home. You need to immerse them in liquid nitrogen in a cryostat and make sure they are guarded by serious security with backup and monitoring systems, you uncivilized heathen.
  #745  
Old 01-25-2018, 11:17 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Champion Chili Chef
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 63,171
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
C'mon, don't mis-characterize me. Everyone knows you can't store human brains in a regular freezer, and you'd be frankly irresponsible to store one at home. You need to immerse them in liquid nitrogen in a cryostat and make sure they are guarded by serious security with backup and monitoring systems, you uncivilized heathen.
Burying that dead meat would be cheaper.
  #746  
Old 01-25-2018, 11:17 AM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 11,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
Then why claim to ignore me and say you don't care as loudly and repeatedly as possible?

You know I don't claim to know the answer to your question because I don't know the way the future will go. Ultimately all that theorem really means in this context, as wolfpup points out :

a. Physical reality is a game with fixed rules. Like all games, one and only one optimal strategy exists, given the same end goal.

b. As smarter beings begin to replace humans - whether that be AIs, cyborgs, genetically engineered humans, it doesn't matter - those beings will have the neural ability to follow more optimal strategies. I know what I am doing now is not optimal, but my cave man emotions won't let me do what I know is better. (hence I don't have a 6-pack, 5 girlfriends, and a job as a quant making 500k a year, even though there exists a sequence of actions I could have logically worked out and taken to get there if I were an inhuman, rational agent)

c. Smarter beings will also have vastly more memory capacity and ability to share data with each other digitally.

Hence, if beings can share data with each other digitally, and analyze it using the most optimal strategy they know about in common, they will reach the same conclusion. In the same way that 2 calculators agree with each other as wolfpup points out.

Part of the reason this idea has impressed me is that religion, politics, personal lifestyle choices - they are all strategies to accomplish goals. Given the same goals and knowledge of the optimal strategy, rational beings wouldn't have 5000 opinions for religion/politics/personal choices. A correct answer (where correct means "most probable strategy to accomplish your goals) exists for each of these "taboo" topics.

If you encountered another being with a different opinion, you could just plug your serial ports together or whatever and swap memory files. You would literally be able to work out mathematically why that being's opinion is different. Maybe one of you is unaware of the most optimal strategy - you could share it with the other, they could run that strategy on their experiences, determine it has a higher expected value, and switch over.
This only works if we also share the same goals. Just the difference of you liking chocolate ice cream, and me preferring vanilla means that that won't work.

And if your solution to that is that we will DETERMINE which is better, and that we will all like chocolate from then on, what you are describing isn't a post singularity society, it is a hive mind.
  #747  
Old 01-25-2018, 11:22 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Champion Chili Chef
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 63,171
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
This only works if we also share the same goals. Just the difference of you liking chocolate ice cream, and me preferring vanilla means that that won't work.

And if your solution to that is that we will DETERMINE which is better, and that we will all like chocolate from then on, what you are describing isn't a post singularity society, it is a hive mind.
Isn't it funny how all those who support the idea of "hive minds" automatically assume that theirs will be the mind the hive is based on?
  #748  
Old 01-25-2018, 11:30 AM
Dewey Finn is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 29,285
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
This is why you're on ignore. You are massively mis-characterizing what I wrote.
Hilarious. Do you not understand how to ignore someone?
  #749  
Old 01-25-2018, 11:35 AM
SamuelA is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
This only works if we also share the same goals. Just the difference of you liking chocolate ice cream, and me preferring vanilla means that that won't work.
That's implicitly true, yes. However, in a large population pool, you most likely will be able to find fellow chocolate lovers, and you would then be able to share data and strategies for finding more chocolate. At the end of the sharing both of you would have agreed on the optimal strategy that finds the most chocolate.

Similarly, if you think of preferences as weights between 0 and 1, it's clearly possible for someone with a different set of preference weights to look at your preference matrix and give you advice that would be verifiably correct as to how to maximize your preferences, even if they do not share them.

Last edited by SamuelA; 01-25-2018 at 11:36 AM.
  #750  
Old 01-25-2018, 12:18 PM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 11,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
That's implicitly true, yes. However, in a large population pool, you most likely will be able to find fellow chocolate lovers, and you would then be able to share data and strategies for finding more chocolate. At the end of the sharing both of you would have agreed on the optimal strategy that finds the most chocolate.
Yes, kill all the vanilla loving heathens.
Quote:
Similarly, if you think of preferences as weights between 0 and 1, it's clearly possible for someone with a different set of preference weights to look at your preference matrix and give you advice that would be verifiably correct as to how to maximize your preferences, even if they do not share them.
Have you met people? People can't quantify their own likes and desires. If you asked someone to make a list of their favorite foods, it would be different on a tuesday vs a saturday.
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:31 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017