Rich, I really have no idea what you talking about. It was probably wrong of me
to attempt to intercede. Good luck with whatever y'all think you are doing
here. (01)
On Jun 7, 2012, at 8:48 PM, Rich Cooper wrote: (02)
> Pat Hayes wrote:
>
> [RG]> In our emerging self interest ontology, I believe we can define an
>agent in one semantically precise sentence. Perhaps the sentence :
>
> >
>
> > “an agent pursues self interest as the agent herself defines it.”
>
> >
>
> > will do the job.
>
> [PH] Well, it has several flaws. Chielfy, it says nothing, Consider a rock
>lying on the ground, for example. This rock's self interest is to lie on the
>ground, and it is pursuing this successfully. We know that this is the rock's
>self interest since this is what the rock is doing, and if its self interest
>were something else then it would be doing that and not be doing this, by
>definition. Ergo, the rock is an agent. Similarly, every other thing in the
>uiniverse is an agent, and they are all pusuing their self-interest goals.
>Which is, of course, absolutely meaningless.
>
> [RC again] Thank you for pointing that out. Remember the Tabula Rasa idea?
>We start with something that is semantically meaningless, at least TO US
>unbiased objective Agents in this here posse.
>
> We don't want to bias our observation before we make it. There is a
>database; that is all we know about it at the start of the Activity. So the
>first thing we know about an Activity, i.e. an Agent, i.e. Event, or any other
>thingette is that there is a database in it.
>
>
> Are you with me so far? (03)
No. You are mot making even the SLIGHTEST sense. This entire thread reads to me
like a mixture of outright insanity and bad politics. It does not seem to have
anything at all to do with ontologies, so I wonder why it is on the ontolog
forum. (04)
Pat (05)
> Feedback would be helpful, any kind of feedback,
>
>
> -Rich
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Rich Cooper
>
> EnglishLogicKernel.com
>
> Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
>
> 9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Pat Hayes
> Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 6:25 PM
> To: Rich Cooper
> Cc: [ontolog-forum]
> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Self Interest Ontology
>
>
> On Jun 7, 2012, at 7:06 PM, Rich Cooper wrote:
>
> > Here is a quote from Marcus Hutter which I think is an excellent definition
>of what it means to be an agent:
>
> I hope you are joking. It is quite a good joke.
>
> >
>
> > “”Solomonoff derived an optimal way of predicting
>
> > future data, given previous perceptions, provided the data is sampled from
>a computable probability distribution. AIXI extends this approach to an
>optimal decision making agent embedded in an unknown environment. The main
>idea is to replace the unknown environmental distribution μ in the Bellman
>equations by a suitably generalized universal Solomonoff distribution . The
>state space is the space of complete histories. AIXI is a universal theory
>without adjustable parameters, making no assumptions about the environment
>except that it is sampled from a computable distribution. >From an algorithmic
>complexity perspective, the AIXI model generalizes optimal passive universal
>induction to the case of active agents.Solomonoff derived an optimal way of
>predicting future data, given previous perceptions, provided the data is
>sampled from a computable probability distribution. AIXI extends this approach
>to an optimal decision making agent embedded in an unknown environment. The
>main idea is to replace the unknown environmental distribution μ in the
>Bellman equations by a suitably generalized universal Solomonoff distribution
>_. The state space is the space of complete histories. AIXI is a universal
>theory without adjustable parameters, making no assumptions about the
>environment except that it is sampled from a computable distribution. From an
>algorithmic complexity perspective, the AIXImodel generalizes optimal passive
>universal induction to the case of active agents.”
>
> >
>
> > Now that sounds like an implementable agent: an agent that could be
>emulated in software completely.
>
> >
>
> > In our emerging self interest ontology, I believe we can define an agent in
>one semantically precise sentence. Perhaps the sentence :
>
> >
>
> > “an agent pursues self interest as the agent herself defines it.”
>
> >
>
> > will do the job.
>
> Well, it has several flaws. Chielfy, it says nothing, Consider a rock lying
>on the ground, for example. This rock's self interest is to lie on the ground,
>and it is pursuing this successfully. We know that this is the rock's self
>interest since this is what the rock is doing, and if its self interest were
>something else then it would be doing that and not be doing this, by
>definition. Ergo, the rock is an agent. Similarly, every other thing in the
>uiniverse is an agent, and they are all pusuing their self-interest goals.
>Which is, of course, absolutely meaningless.
>
> > Then we need a decision making engine just like the one AIXI emulates, or
>perhaps other choices TBD.
>
> >
>
> > How is the plan doing so far?
>
> I am rather late to this party, but why are we even talking about "self
>interest" ? Many, perhaps most, actions are taken by people not in their own
>self interest but from motives involving the interests of others. A theory of
>actions, separated from amy ideas about "self" interst, would seem like a
>better place to start.
>
> Pat
>
> >
>
> > Suggestions, corrections, critiques, dialogs, whatever very much
>appreciated.
>
> >
>
> > -Rich
>
> >
>
> > Sincerely,
>
> > Rich Cooper
>
> > EnglishLogicKernel.com
>
> > Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
>
> > 9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2
>
> >
>
> > _________________________________________________________________
>
> > Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>
> > Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
>
> > Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> > Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>
> > Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>
> > To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973
>
> 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office
>
> Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax
>
> FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile
>
> phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
>
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>
> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
>
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>
> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (06)
------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973
40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office
Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax
FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes (07)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (08)
|