Profile cover photo
Profile photo
Alf Steinbach
67 followers -
What's a Google+ tagline? Who knows. It should have been explained.
What's a Google+ tagline? Who knows. It should have been explained.

67 followers
About
Posts

Post has attachment
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Difficult predicting which President Hillary will be, it is.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
PhotoPhotoPhotoPhotoPhoto
April 30, 2016 Tur til Henningsvær
144 Photos - View album
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
A Windows-user-friendly PDF of Martin Davis' critique of Penrose's Gödel-based no-machine-minds arguments, essentially showing that Penrose's contention that finding a Gödel sentence involves insight, is wrong, since it can be generated by an algorithm.

Regarding just how to understand that Penrose is (or how he is) WRONG, I think my own argument of putting Penrose in the place of the machine intelligence, is both far simpler and more convincing.

I created this PDF using the GhostView ps2pdf script, but I found no improvement of quality relative to the result from ImageMagick convert, which is easier to use. I guess GraphicsMagick can also do the job. These are all command line tools, though.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Changed the name from “Philosophy X” to “Good thinking!”. :)

New stuff now include a little bit about Blaise Pascal, René Descartes and Kurt Gödel, in particular the latter two's attempted proofs of the existence of the Christian faith's god. This is in section 4.6 on the Gödel question objection to MI, which is new and about 4/5 complete. Also added a frontpage generated by Word.

Those who want a more technical account of the Gödel question idea and how it's a (heap of very much more than one) fallacy, can check out my June 2010 blog posting “An ironclad proof that you are smarter than Roger Penrose” at (https://alfps.wordpress.com/2010/06/03/an-ironclad-proof-that-you-are-smarter-than-roger-penrose/).

[This is a draft of the first few chapters of a possible book, at the current point of writing, about 64 A4 pages in Book Antiqua 12 pt.]
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
My readable transcript of the otherwise difficult-to-read facsimiles of Alan Turing's 1948 “Intelligent Machinery” paper.

Already in 1948 Alan Turing experimented with unorganized very primitive NAND-based neural networks and machine learning. And he noted that intelligence is a cultural phenomenon. It's not exactly difficult to see, so it probably says something that current top people in the field apparently don't understand that.

Notable shortcomings of this paper include that Turing did not regard associative memory to be part of intelligence. Indeed he designed his tests and suggested applications to avoid that aspect. I'm not sure but if tastes to me like he was trying to get funding & approval for a project with somewhat better equipment than his "paper machines" (people emulating computers).

(Subsequently to transcribing this and seeking the help of B. Jack Copeland about the unreadable small parts, I learned from him that there already is a transcript in his book "The Essential Turing" (Oxford University Press). It's available as an e-book. However, it costs £25.)
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
I posted this question after a strong indication that at least some physicists believe the answer is "yes" but are unwilling to state that openly. So far, no comments and no answers. Well it's only half an hour or so, and I do not know the answer for sure, but still, that silence reinforces my growing belief that even PHYSICS today has devolved to group conformity (a.k.a. religion) instead of rational science, logic and facts.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
From a walk to Vikan on 9th of May, 2014.
PhotoPhotoPhotoPhotoPhoto
Vikan Star Wars
5 Photos - View album
Add a comment...
Wait while more posts are being loaded