Interestingly somebody gave you a +1 Funny and the other guy is down to a +3 now.
So now it is a little more fair (albeit with more redundancy.)
I've posted enough about this thing now...(if people look at my posting history they'll think that this kind of thing is all that I care about...)
Hmmm...maybe other slashdot users were watching the recut DVD in which Pertinax18 posted first.
(There must be a +5 funny lurking somewhere in this thread...:))
Sorry, I got lazy and decided for the first time not to preview. That will teach me.
>Tried using Visual C++ Express edition but it seems more trouble to use (e.g., there's no automatic prompt to prevent the DOS box from disappearing).
This is a real annoyance for me, too. I've searched through the dialogs a little and didn't find it. (Although if I program with the IDE a little more I would just Google for the option.)
Incidentally, another quick hack you can use in this situation is to add a std::cin.getline() at the end of the program. However, I feel bad saying that because you'll be far more productive in the long run if you just look it up.
>Tried using Visual C++ Express edition but it seems more trouble to use (e.g., there's no automatic prompt to prevent the DOS box from disappearing).
This is a real annoyance for me, too. I've searched through the dialogs a little and didn't find it. (Although if I program with the IDE a little more I would just Google for the option.)
Incidentally, another quick hack you can use in this situation is to add a std::cin.getline() at the end of the program. However, I feel bad saying that because you'll be far more productive in the long run if you just look it up.
Right. And if anybody commits a different sin (i.e. lying, coveting, stealing, being an alcoholic, being born with original sin, etc.) then you warn them a couple of times and kick them out.
My understanding is that many (all?) Christian denominations consider everyone to be a sinner so even if gayness is considered a sin, it just becomes one of many things that the church suggests you don't do.
I actually took a three-course sequence in which our assignment was to build something like this. (Needless to say, nobody ever completed it to be something more than a toy...and in fact over the last ten or so years where this project was offered, I don't think anybody's project moved beyond a toy problem.
I think Jim's assessment of the first six steps is fairly accurate. Creating a virtual world that contains semantic names for objects and basic actions is doable, although it requires a lot of brute force work to make it accurate. I can see where he might think that given this problem, vision is the greatest block.
However, the subject of interest here is how you build an AI to inhabit the world.
In my class, once we had built a parser, a generator, and a virtual world like the one just described, we attempted to build a world in which we can "talk" with the computer to control it.
Essentially, it was a rule-based system where meshes would move around depending on the truth values of semantic variables and relations determined by examining the scene (i.e. if a character is located within 3 units of another one then its NEAR truth value gets changed to true. Of course, figuring out what is near, far, left of, etc. is actually not trivial because it varies based on the objects and the subject.) One of the greatest problems with the project is that specifying the right set of rules can be extremely difficult with all sorts of special cases that you have to worry about. Another problem was that the computer just did what we told it to (i.e. there was absolutely no possibility of it going evil or doing something unexpected...)
Further, we had to be especially careful with how we communicate with the computer in English. Your conversations with the computer about the baseball would be incredibly difficult to implement. For you to be able to do something like that you would need to:
* have a large set of common sense rules (i.e. a working CYC that happens to be in a usable format) Keep in mind that they have been working on this for something like 15 years...
* Teach the computer slang, jokes, conversation goals, a strong understanding of what you are saying (you wouldn't believe how difficult it is to establish context)
Further, even if you get everything above working, you still have to worry about problems like:
* People speak different languages. * Common sense varies among people. Not everyone shares the same view of reality. * How will you adequately describe the syntax of a language when no formal grammar can be complete? * How will the program interpret slang, idioms, and jokes? * With only a text interface, you won't detect if somebody is sarcastic or serious Everything above is a former or current research problem, but since they have been in progress since the sixties, they are obviously really hard.
You glossed over these areas. You described the somewhat straight-forward act of building a virtual world and haven't touched the AI at all. Further, you kind of ignored the robotics aspects (i.e. when you say that your AI will go to the exit of your house, you are assuming a lot compared to the current state of robotics.
BTW, my prof pitched our project the same way that you did. (i.e. you are not original at all...) My prof told us:
* Using VR is what makes this AI framework special because it gives the AI context * We can provide some method for it to learn new words by describing via other words * Create objects, actions, etc.
Further, he gave us a framework very similar to the one that you have presented...
Slashdot Mirror
Interestingly somebody gave you a +1 Funny and the other guy is down to a +3 now. So now it is a little more fair (albeit with more redundancy.) I've posted enough about this thing now...(if people look at my posting history they'll think that this kind of thing is all that I care about...)
Please see my other reply, it makes more sense.
Thanks.
Hmmm...maybe other slashdot users were reading the recut slashdot in which Pertinax18 posted first.
Hmmm...maybe other slashdot users were watching the recut DVD in which Pertinax18 posted first. (There must be a +5 funny lurking somewhere in this thread... :))
After looking at this more closely, it seems that you did in fact post first. Why don't people like you? Is it a high slashdot UID bias?
It looks like you just lost the race condition... To make things worth, pretty soon you'll be modded redundant.
The previous Quakes were, but Raven has been granted permission to produce Quake 4.
(See subject)
Yeah. And that is great for me because I have an assertion-related agenda that I want to promote. And now I can stuff the survey! Mwa Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!
Is Anonymous Coward really a "trusted Slashdot personality"? I've followed a few of your links and have arrived at unexpected places.
>Tried using Visual C++ Express edition but it seems more trouble to use (e.g., there's no automatic prompt to prevent the DOS box from disappearing).
This is a real annoyance for me, too. I've searched through the dialogs a little and didn't find it. (Although if I program with the IDE a little more I would just Google for the option.)
Incidentally, another quick hack you can use in this situation is to add a std::cin.getline() at the end of the program. However, I feel bad saying that because you'll be far more productive in the long run if you just look it up.
>Tried using Visual C++ Express edition but it seems more trouble to use (e.g., there's no automatic prompt to prevent the DOS box from disappearing). This is a real annoyance for me, too. I've searched through the dialogs a little and didn't find it. (Although if I program with the IDE a little more I would just Google for the option.) Incidentally, another quick hack you can use in this situation is to add a std::cin.getline() at the end of the program. However, I feel bad saying that because you'll be far more productive in the long run if you just look it up.
You're of course correct. I guess I wasn't reading this thread too carefully. (i.e. Nothing to see here, please move along...)
Right. And if anybody commits a different sin (i.e. lying, coveting, stealing, being an alcoholic, being born with original sin, etc.) then you warn them a couple of times and kick them out.
My understanding is that many (all?) Christian denominations consider everyone to be a sinner so even if gayness is considered a sin, it just becomes one of many things that the church suggests you don't do.
I actually took a three-course sequence in which our assignment was to build something like this. (Needless to say, nobody ever completed it to be something more than a toy...and in fact over the last ten or so years where this project was offered, I don't think anybody's project moved beyond a toy problem.
I think Jim's assessment of the first six steps is fairly accurate. Creating a virtual world that contains semantic names for objects and basic actions is doable, although it requires a lot of brute force work to make it accurate. I can see where he might think that given this problem, vision is the greatest block.
However, the subject of interest here is how you build an AI to inhabit the world.
In my class, once we had built a parser, a generator, and a virtual world like the one just described, we attempted to build a world in which we can "talk" with the computer to control it.
Essentially, it was a rule-based system where meshes would move around depending on the truth values of semantic variables and relations determined by examining the scene (i.e. if a character is located within 3 units of another one then its NEAR truth value gets changed to true. Of course, figuring out what is near, far, left of, etc. is actually not trivial because it varies based on the objects and the subject.) One of the greatest problems with the project is that specifying the right set of rules can be extremely difficult with all sorts of special cases that you have to worry about. Another problem was that the computer just did what we told it to (i.e. there was absolutely no possibility of it going evil or doing something unexpected...)
Further, we had to be especially careful with how we communicate with the computer in English. Your conversations with the computer about the baseball would be incredibly difficult to implement. For you to be able to do something like that you would need to:
* have a large set of common sense rules (i.e. a working CYC that happens to be in a usable format) Keep in mind that they have been working on this for something like 15 years...
* Teach the computer slang, jokes, conversation goals, a strong understanding of what you are saying (you wouldn't believe how difficult it is to establish context)
Further, even if you get everything above working, you still have to worry about problems like:
* People speak different languages.
* Common sense varies among people. Not everyone shares the same view of reality.
* How will you adequately describe the syntax of a language when no formal grammar can be complete?
* How will the program interpret slang, idioms, and jokes?
* With only a text interface, you won't detect if somebody is sarcastic or serious
Everything above is a former or current research problem, but since they have been in progress since the sixties, they are obviously really hard.
You glossed over these areas. You described the somewhat straight-forward act of building a virtual world and haven't touched the AI at all. Further, you kind of ignored the robotics aspects (i.e. when you say that your AI will go to the exit of your house, you are assuming a lot compared to the current state of robotics.
BTW, my prof pitched our project the same way that you did. (i.e. you are not original at all...) My prof told us:
* Using VR is what makes this AI framework special because it gives the AI context
* We can provide some method for it to learn new words by describing via other words
* Create objects, actions, etc.
Further, he gave us a framework very similar to the one that you have presented...