The Lounge - CodeProject

CDP1802 wrote:
It is called evolution.

There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.

Stop lauging! We did not come to the end of the joke yet!

Evolutionary algorithms[^] actually work very well and even a high school student can manage some simple implementation in just one evening.

The real joke would be the insane amounts of processing (and real) time that would be needed to evolve anything with noticable intelligence. Mother nature needed quite a few (hundred) million years and the algorithm would most probably not be faster.

The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here

This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.

"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."

If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.

I'll gladly go to the soapbox to continue discussing your interesting theory.

There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.

That must wait until after work, but I would love to show you my Orcs, which evolve a solution for fighting in a browser game in mere minutes. Plus the bonus of continuously adapting to whatever ways the players figure out to beat them.

The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here

This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.

"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."

If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.

CDP1802 wrote:
which evolve a solution for fighting in a browser game in mere minutes. Plus the bonus of continuously adapting to whatever ways the players figure out to beat them

But it all boils down to a bunch of if-else statements. That's not intelligence.

There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.

On the contrary. I made this to replace the if-else-logic. On this level, learning (or better: adaptation) happens in the evolutionary algorithm. Each instance is created with all its acquired information in its 'genes' (or configuration). If it proves to be better than the others, it will be selected for reproduction, with a small chance of a mutation. Through the mutations new values come into the genome.

Given enough generations of selection, reproduction and mutation, you will get a solution close enough to the optimum. If the criteria of selection change, then the genes will again need a few generations to adapt.

This is still a very primitive AI, but it's good enough for a game. but what if you apply such an evolutionary algorithm to configure the topology and weights in a neural network?

The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here

This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.

"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."

If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.

I'm not sure if your are still talking programming or actual life. If you want to discuss evolution in actual life, we'll need to go to the soapbox. If you want to discuss it in terms of programming, there's nothing to discuss. Someone wrote code. Period.

There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.

RyanDev wrote:
Someone wrote code. Period.

May I ask why you see a difference there? Selection, reproduction and mutation simply exist in nature, in a program they must be implemented. Still, the basic principles remain the same.

The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here

This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.

"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."

If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.

CDP1802 wrote:
May I ask why you see a difference there?

The difference is computers are stupid and idiotic. They can only process 1s and 0s. There is no intelligence whatsoever in a computer. There cannot be any mutations. Computers do exactly and only exactly what they are told.

There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.

True, but our genes are also only made of base pairs. Molecules are not very intelligent either, but obviously they are used to hold the information that controls the small biochemical machines known as living cells. Mutations are just little errors which happen along the way. They bring new values into play and will be passed to future generations if they prove to be benificial in any way.

Neurons are living cells which implement a logical function, an algorithm. We have quite a few examples of existing brains which represent networks of such neurons and which supposedly display intelligence.

A computer can emulate these mechanisms. Regardless of the resources and time needed, or how precise or abstract the emulation has to be, but generally I see no fundamental obstacle that would make this impossible to do on a computer and that the results would be similar to nature.

The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here

This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.

"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."

If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.

CDP1802 wrote:
living

There is the keyword.

There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.

Living = complex biochemical processes inside a cell. Do I really have to simulate them all if I only want to emulate the logical switching function of a neuron?

I see no mystical unmeasurable life energy that somehow would be missing in an emulated neuron and preventing it from behaving similar enough to its natural counterpart.

And one more thing: Hardware and software are said to be compatible, meaning that if you are able to define a valid algorithm, then you can implement it either in form of a program or design an equivalent logical circuit. Just countless numbers of logic gates with an enormously complex wiring that possibly implements the algorithm 'intelligence'.

The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here

This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.

"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."

If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.

CDP1802 wrote:
Living = complex biochemical processes inside a cell.

Not really. Living means having a soul, a spirit, or whatever you want to call it. Science cannot make a soul and that is where the intelligence originates; therefore, we'll never be able to make true intelligence.

There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.

Then it must be impossible to study it and gather a mathematical model of a cell's function and the emulation must, without obvious reason, differ from the original. Why does this not happen in models used in medical or pharma applications?

Or, if such unexplained differences exist, why is there no way to find their cause?

The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here

This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.

"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."

If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.

CDP1802 wrote:
Then it must be impossible to study it

I don't see why. Confused | :confused:

There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.

Because this soul must be the thing that makes the difference between a living cell and my, as you believe, not working simulation. If it were something that can be measured, then I would of course take it into account and the simulation would work. Therefore it must be something that cannot be measured and that there is even no clue to where to look for it.

Your belief in all honor, but I find it hard to believe in the existence of a thing that can't be seen, measured or does not at least cause any noticable effects. A simulation can be plagued with all kinds of problems, including overly simplifying the model or too little precision, but a missing soul seems not to be among them.

The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here

This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.

"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."

If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.

CDP1802 wrote:
If it were something that can be measured

I'm sure it can. Science doesn't know how to yet but that doesn't mean it can't be measured. Perhaps the Ghostbusters were on to something. $Shucks | :-\$

CDP1802 wrote:
but I find it hard to believe in the existence of a thing that can't be seen, measured or does not at least cause any noticable effects.

You've never seen anything that was dead? That's pretty noticeable.

What about love and other emotions? They cannot be seen, measured, and often don't have any noticeable effects yet I'm certain you still believe in them.

I would also imagine you believe there are stars, planets, asteroids, etc, beyond how far we can currently observe yet none of it can be seen.

I don't think your belief in only tangible things is as black and white as you maybe thought it was.

There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.

RyanDev wrote:
You've never seen anything that was dead? That's pretty noticeable.

Yes, the biochemical processes have broken down. Many cells may have enough resources to keep on going on their own for a while, but then they will also die. Actually not so different from my PC at home. It does not boot anymore and if just the right transistors have given up their small electronic souls, then it might very well lead to the death of some other components.

Yes, I know, I have a stubborn naturalistic view that leaves little room for any mysticism.

RyanDev wrote:
What about love and other emotions? They cannot be seen, measured, and often don't have any noticeable effects yet I'm certain you still believe in them.

Why do you ask me? Especially most females I have encountered accuse me of being unemotional and unbearably logical.

RyanDev wrote:
I don't think your belief in only tangible things is as black and white as you maybe thought it was.

I do my best to know, not to believe. Until I don't get any indication that's convincing enough, I will not go hunting for Bigfoot, Yetis, Loch Ness monsters, ghosts, trolls or goblins. And, until I have actually caught one of these, I will not try to make one of them responsible for any other things I'm not happy about.

The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here

This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.

"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."

If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.

CDP1802 wrote:
Yes, the biochemical processes have broken down. Many cells may have enough resources to keep on going on their own for a while, but then they will also die. Actually not so different from my PC at home. It does not boot anymore and if just the right transistors have given up their small electronic souls, then it might very well lead to the death of some other components.

All your seeing is the effect of the soul on the physical parts. Similar to watching a mechanical device move yet you can't see (at least not with your eye) the electrons that are doing the actual work.

CDP1802 wrote:
Why do you ask me? Especially most females I have encountered accuse me of being unemotional and unbearably logical.

You're evading the question. Sniff | :^)

CDP1802 wrote:
I do my best to know, not to believe.

As do I.

There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.

Sorry, but I strongly believed I had to go home. Smile | :)

RyanDev wrote:
All your seeing is the effect of the soul on the physical parts. Similar to watching a mechanical device move yet you can't see (at least not with your eye) the electrons that are doing the actual work.

No. Electrons can't do anything at all if The Force is not with you. And when The Force is with you then you can just as well turn off the targeting computer and blow up a Death Star. Just fire when the voices in your head tell you trust them and then simply to do so. Big Grin | :-D

Seriously, science is all about learning about previously unknown phenomena. The process usually is to observe something that cannot be explained with existing knowledge, gathering more information and then attempting to use your information and logic to describe what you are looking for. This theory then enables you to make predictions which can be tested and then may confirm or falsify your theory. Never ever has the belief in magic led to any knowledge so far.

Anyway, I really hope you are just trying to keep a good argument going. If I were religious, I would prefer to praise god for what he really did.

The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here

This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.

"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."

If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.

CDP1802 wrote:
Seriously, science is all about learning about previously unknown phenomena. The process usually is to observe something that cannot be explained with existing knowledge, gathering more information and then attempting to use your information and logic to describe what you are looking for. This theory then enables you to make predictions which can be tested and then may confirm or falsify your theory. Never ever has the belief in magic led to any knowledge so far.

Agreed. So?

There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.

So, what leads you to the conclusion that a soul is essential for life. What observations led you to believe that only this describes what is needed to explain your observations? What properties does it have? Where is the difference between a biochemical reacion in a cell or the same reaction in a test tube? In extension, how does this soul enable cells to perform in a way that they become components of an intelligent system? Why do you think that it's absolutely impossible to make logical gates which have the same properties?

Lots of questions and without some answers I can easily come up with countless other 'explanations' which actually explain nothing at all.

The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here

This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.

"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."

If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.

CDP1802 wrote:
So, what leads you to the conclusion that a soul is essential for life.

Because without one you die. $Shucks | :-\$

There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.

And how do we test this claim?

The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here

This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.

"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."

If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.

CDP1802 wrote:
And how do we test this claim?

Remove one. I suggest you test on someone else.

There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.

Welcome to the Lounge