Some 3-D Trig [was Re: Mar...]

Just to clarify from a different perspective:- the above are two short books which summarise much of the work of one of this century's most influential philosophers. Both written in the 1990s, a clue to their conception lies in Quine's statement that "Philosophy of science is philosophy enough". Since his 1951 paper "Two Dogmas of Empiricism", Quine has made the case for the most austere empiricism in the history of philosophy aka "Enlightened Empiricism". In some respects he could be said to have brought the objectives of Positivism to fruition. In two Dogmas" he shows that there are good grounds for rejecting the very premise for there being a distinct philosophy (the pursuit of meaning through the analysis of language) namely that of analyticity. This leaves one with the pursuit of truth - science. Clarification of the pursuit of truth becomes naturalized epistemology, (philosophy of science). This in turn is to be rooted in the empirical analysis of learning.

Those interested should consult the references given above and elsewhere.

It has some serious implications for the future of various lines of work within what is widely referred to as "Cognitive Science" - for reasons which may or may not now be immediately apparent. I have, in a number of different threads, made an effort to explicate some of this over recent weeks. What folk do and what they think they do should be looked at in the context of research on actuarial vs. clinical judgement. A section in the following paper covers an applied project's theoretical sections and provides some of the key research findings and references.

formatting link
other papers at that site are also relevant - though on first glance they will appeal to few.

Reply to
David Longley
Loading thread data ...

Warning: This is just an Eray flame. It's not very serious-minded but just casual commentary. Don't want to waste anybody's time.

What does writing like an "undergraduate" mean? Some high schools in the U.S. provide a better education than some colleges in the U.S. Some people experience home schooling. Some people don't have higher education but are very studious. Some people I've hired with a college education (3.0+ GPA) can't manage a single-page business letter that accomplishes any purpose.

People like Curt and I clean up their messes. God save organizations from using software "donated" by CS departments and "my nephew the programmer." But at least give them a "class project," and not something by one Phd student.

I wonder where those 2 years, 12/7 in the cellar required to write a serious program accomplishing "data mining" and "parallel computing" fits in with all the "personal study" in philosophy and psychology, Phd studies, and classes, not to mention newsgroup posting? Are we talking about a university "computer lab" with all those distractions?

50 or 100 minutes once or twice a day?

B.S. Degree if these posts are representative. Let's have a link to his CNET review or equivalent. And I didn't mean Bachelor of Science.

Eray isn't. He's discussing Computer Science *words*.

What background? First you study, keeping your mouth shut and paying respect to your teachers. Then you go into whatever field. Then other's carry you along, put up with you, and help you out for a couple of years while you make a continuous stream of stupid mistakes that later cause you no end of embarrassment. Then you practice for

20+ years. Then you have "background." If you remain a student, you remain a student, never having to meet any test but a "grade." That's not the real world. Grades are easy. If you want a high one, just just work harder, and you almost always get it. In the real world, you work your ass off and usually get nothing. But you pick up the pieces and try again, and eventually you may make the real "grade," otherwise known as real accomplishment or track-record, also known as growing up. If one wants to remain a professional student, fine, get published. Provide a link to your book on Amazon, or papers in respected scientific journals.

What sort of person issues intellectual threats? Has temper tantrums? Makes distinctions forever? Says the word "why" 7 times in a row until you run out of answers (pushing you into metaphysics)? I hope when Eray grows up and has some teenage Erays of his own, he doesn't think there's anything "inherited." Most educated teenagers are like that, and I've known some who could talk up a metaphysical storm just like Eray.

There's some logic.

Oh, that's just so impressive. What kid doesn't write assembler computer games next thing after the "Hello world" program. I wrote them in my 1st year too. It's nothing. Lots of other posters did too. But in those days it was a lot more low level than in 1993. You got a cartidge, 80 opcodes, and maybe 20K of memory to work with, and you programmed every scan line individually. Yet some programmers turned that into real computer games *in marketable form* that people actually *bought*, with reviews they could *link to* with *their name* at the top.

Funny coming from someone who talks about "SQL" and the databases that go with it, like they are going to have any applicability to AI. Let's have a link to the AI database Eray has designed from the ground up and beta-tested, designed for processors 10 years from now, or at least a definition. Oh yeah, I forgot, the paper would be too long, it would be too complex to post, etc., etc. Meaning the terminology will be the same pop lingo we've gotten to date.

Eray has been doing the piss contest since the beginning. You are just providing a forum for her to reiterate her bachelor and masters degrees and that she is a "Phd student." What I want to know is: If she has all these degrees and is in some "university" why does she never supply input from any collegues, except the one physicist she mentioned (and rated - as he gives his "Eray Rating" to everyone he mentions)? Is this a two-man university? Does anybody there talk to him? This doesn't add up. Some of the criticism he has received could easily be resolved by a walk down the hall in any university I know of. And why doesn't this university require students to seek out persons of real accomplishment? Or bring them in to lecture? Why is it always a book? Some crazy university, or a lot of people avoiding Eray, or something else that doesn't add up.

Yeah, right. How about the moderator post where he said everybody needed a bachelors degree? (and plenty else).

The rejection of his ideas is why he keeps resorting to the degrees and the temper tantrums. So, like Descartes who forgot to think for a second, Poof!, no more Usenet presence that matters.

Which seems to be very frequently, usually by not-so-clever and not-so-subtle implication, and why do you think it is so necessary?

Brain programming again. Eray is going to program Longley's brain. I already saw one example. Lot's of luck.

The bottom line. And no respect for *free* personal surgically-maximized teaching either. What do you normally get per hour, David?

The above says nothing. Algorithm is a stupid word for programmers. Programmers write programs, subroutines, code-blocks, DLL's, etc. What programmer sits down to write an "algorithm." I can't remember hearing it in any programmer group in 20 years (I'm sure it was). It's a fancy word in the literature, that's all. The Blowfish author didn't sit down to write an "algorithm" (though always called that in the literature), he sat down to write an encryption program. Data mining is a mundane chore. Inferential searches, tautological searches, it's all being done by thousands of *experienced* programmers light-years ahead of Eray. Parallel programming (not "computing") can be a can of worms, or just a fancy word, or anywhere in-between.

Thanks again for the reminder that you are at a university. That is most impressive. But does he actually walk in the door, or just hang out on the steps? Does Eray come from some country where only one in a thousand attend a university? Last time I heard, about half of H.S. students in the U.S. go to college. Whatever, it's no big deal here. Nobody I know even mentions it, certainly not me. I have a good friend I've known for about 8 years, and I only recently found out he has masters degrees in both CS and engineering. I'm looking at 10,000 pages of language and Window's documentation I have to replace and learn about every three years. Wish I were back in college so I could have some fun. What's the big deal about degrees with Eray?

The "Run" button please? Programming isn't like psychology or philosophy. There is always a good empirical test. Like at the chess club nobody wants to hear you tell them how great you are, just what your USCF rating is. Or in music, ok, sing or play for 30 seconds. That's why you don't hear the experienced programmers in this group boasting to each other about how great they are.

Great. Another paper that would prove everything, but is just too long or "Eray terminology challeged" to understand.

Fancy way of saying he wrote a computer program. Big deal. Link to the CNET review (or equivalent)?

Again, not in the programming groups I've read for 20 years.

I wish I had a dime for every time Eray has used the term "function." Is this "higher math" he keeps talking about algebra? If it's programming, a "function" is simply a subroutine that returns a value. f(X) is the key to AI? Sure, sounds pretty mysterious to me.

I'd like to work on a unified field theory. But unfortunately I'm not qualified, and I'm mature enough to realize it. But I suppose I could talk up a storm. "Quantum anti-proton plasma synthesis effects on the Swarthchild limit in white hole parity" by Larry Fine. Get your copy today.

Hah. Comparing Eray and Curt. What a joke. Better to compare Eray and Ken, but Ken has demonstrated more programming experience than Eray. At least he has programmed long enough in one sitting for his sugar content to go down.

Another thing that doesn't add up. I've noticed since Eray's very first post (where she immediately called one author "smarter" than another by the way), she is very sloppy about logic, especially terms, like the average person. I can apply charity as well as the next guy and logic experience doesn't mean anything regarding content, but my point is: Doesn't a study of philosophy necessarily include logic? What CS department doesn't require logic courses? And he also threw out the term "incompleteness theorem" at me one time, but he didn't know if it applied to classical logic or not. (Let him keep wondering.)

When I start proving my arguments by listing my degrees, throwing temper tantrums, and writing spaced-out philosophy of the not-altogether-here kind, intellectual threats, or thinly disguised religion, then I will be inviting some personal criticism too.

Larry

Reply to
Acme Debugging

Why stop at one page when you can waffle on dropping TLA upon FLA generously peppered with unrelated buzzwords for fourteen pages? :-)

Reply to
Bernd Felsche

These two paragraphs are really funny.

In the first he says a portion of computer science is unnecessary. He says it's just programming. It's also quite funny that this guy compares his programming to mine. Anyway. The second is even more fun, because he talks about me not being the top hacker I said I was. Well, it doesn't really bother me when lamers make this kind of remarks. But if, you know if a hacker had said something about a program I wrote I might have something to say and fix a bug or two.

I also like "*experienced* programmers light-years ahead of Eray" phrase. You idiot, I designed a core parallel data mining algorithm and made tons of experiments with its implementation among other experimental machine learning codes. What the hell do you think data mining research consists of?

90% of the lamers in the industry aren't better than what I was in my freshmen year and before. Now buzz off.
Reply to
Eray Ozkural exa

I agree with you Eray.

Yes, that was kind of stupid. Now that I think of it, I *do* talk about algorithms now and then.

It was self-serving, at least, because I lack your CS academic credentials, and to be honest, I don't know what the heck knowledge you may have that I don't have.

Yes, for all I know, yours is light-years ahead of mine.

That was stupid of me now that I think about it. How could I possibly know how good you were at hacking?

It would be meaningless to me too.

No, I don't know anything about your software. I'm sure it's less buggy than most.

Again, it sounds like you know a lot about programming that I don't know.

Well on this point, I may have some knowledge that you don't have, but I'm sure you have some I don't have too.

That's very likely. If your programming ability reflects your seemingly vast knowledge of literature on several subjects for a young age (I'm guessing '20s), and of course 90% of "programmers" are just hobbyists and over-enthused.

I see know that many of my comments were quite emotional and self-serving. I didn't pay too much attention to my logic. Worst of all, from my point of view, I said a lot of things based on facts not in evidence. I'm surprised you didn't slam me for that crack about "little Erays." That's way out of line in any post. Anyway, I sincerely apologize.

I do realize that it takes a great deal of discipline to make criticism worthy of serious argument. Guess I just lost it in this post, and your response is justified. But I did label it as a flame, not very serious-minded, and casual commentary like most of your posts. So please consider not holding me to a rigorous standard here such as I would expect in a critical post not so labeled, like the ones you chose not to address.

Larry

Reply to
Acme Debugging

Yeah. And these days you're lucky if the legal dept. will let you put anything in writing, including "Hi, thanks, have a nice day." (That could interpreted as confirming receipt of something that might possibly incur some liability some day.) You have to learn how to compose a letter that says absolutely nothing at all. Maybe that's one of those secret reasons some people are posting in newsgroups?

Larry

Reply to
Acme Debugging

Most excellent, sprayed tea into keyboard, ROFLMAO :o) :o) :o) etc.

best regards

Robin G Hewitt

Reply to
Robin G Hewitt

"Things that work."

Universally accepted. The goal of comp.ai.philosophy. What is and is not OT. The distinction between religion/esoteric philosophy and logic/science. What Neil means by pragmatic thinking. What makes programming useful. What makes behaviorism useful. What makes cognitive science useful. What makes neuroscience useful. What Minsky is trying to say. What Longely is trying to say. What Eray wants us to ignore. Why Ken is not taken seriously. Why Curt is. What ended the Dark Ages. What decides which culture will prevail. The common denominator. The bridge between fields. A focus to promote civility and teamwork. What we need to talk about to achieve AI of any kind. What does and doesn't get Larry flames.

"Ingoramus" :-)

Larry

Reply to
Acme Debugging

Of course. You wouldn't say "two origamuses" would you?

Larry 8~:)

Reply to
Acme Debugging

In sci.logic I have to add "apparently." They are real persnickety.

That's probably the best that could be said of them. Thanks.

Don't forget "grandstanding."

(Thanks for the criticism. I'm chewin' on it.)

Larry

Reply to
Acme Debugging
Behavioral psychology constitutes the most effective behavioral technology of all time.

By the way, Neil, what would you know about being a "real" scientist?

Neil W Rickert wrote in message

Reply to
Glen M. Sizemore

Thanks :-) But to be honest, I was trying to type the Gettysburg Address.

Sorry about the keyboard. If it persists or progresses to the vomiting stage, you may want to consult Dr. Longley. Just tell him you are laughing at Larry jokes. No, wait. Better to say Larry has entered your environment and caused your tea to exhibit unusual behavior.

Larry

Reply to
Acme Debugging

By that logic the infant Jesus was visited by Magoos

I'm amazed they could find the place

*smirkier*

Robin

Reply to
Robin G Hewitt

Perhaps origamos ?

*smirk*

Fred.

Reply to
Fred Mailhot

"smirkier" :-)

Larry

Reply to
Acme Debugging

Arrogant patronizing ad hominem drivel. This sort of post never changes people's behavior in the intended direction. It's, well, childish and immature to suppose that it does.

Reply to
Trewth Seeker

That you think so shows what a weak grasp you have of the subjects Quine discusses. Rickert asked Walz for references pertaining to the "Theory of Science" that he was talking about. The notion that Quine's books pertain to *that* is downright Platonic.

Reply to
Trewth Seeker

What the hell are you talking about? The philosophy of science, as discussed by Popper, Feyerabend, and Lakatos is all about the *process* by which scientific discovery can occur. Just what do you suppose Feyerabend's "Against Method" is about? Not "justification", you ignoramus.

My God but you're an arrogant preening prick -- and Fine's got his mouth wide open for you.

Reply to
Trewth Seeker

Right, you proceed like some sophisticated philosopher, such as Lakatos, suggested.

Reply to
Trewth Seeker

In article , Trewth Seeker writes

Then enlighten me - what is "Theory of Science" if it is not the philosophy of science.

Reply to
David Longley

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.