The Altera Centauri collection has been brought up to date by Darsnan. It comprises every decent scenario he's been able to find anywhere on the web, going back over 20 years.
25 themes/skins/styles are now available to members. Check the select drop-down at the bottom-left of each page.
Call To Power 2 Cradle 3+ mod in progress: https://apolyton.net/forum/other-games/call-to-power-2/ctp2-creation/9437883-making-cradle-3-fully-compatible-with-the-apolyton-edition
It hasn't gone in two different directions. It hasn't gone anywhere really.
Information is data that we find usefull. Thats about all there is to it.
I was under the impression you started this to discuss the source of information in the molecules of life. If its just about the whichness of why its all heat and no movement.
The source of the information is the evironment. Even in the case of the program. Without an evironment that includes something to interpret it its just noise.
You are right we are discussing the source of information in the molecules of life but there is a question of definitions that should be resolved first. Your posts are very relevant but if there is no agreement on the real nature of information then we will all be posting past each other. I have to go to work now so I will get back to this thread later.
The real nature of information is that inteligent beings call usefull data information. The rest is called noise.
Data is not the same as information in the way you are going at it. DNA has data. It also has a lot of noise.
I think the reason you aren't able to decide on definitions is that you don't like them unless they contribute to the claim that DNA has information instead of data. Settle on calling it data and then you can get somewhere instead of thrashing about.
The only way to get anywhere is to reduce the noise and ambiguity down to a moderate level.
Too many people are taking this too many directions in one time.
The other issue is that you can't have rambling answers. All they do is introduce ambiguity into the answer. We should construct questions where the answers are; that question is clearly not elemental enough, yes, no and 'no but theres a reason'. Unless we reduce the ambiguity in the discussion, we will get into complex analysis of the meaning of answers.
the non-intelligent algorithm created data,in portions of which a human being would find information (through data processing in the brain), including a newly invented word 'yualarti'. Yes or No?
Originally posted by Jack_www
These are things we know.
Try and keep up, Jack, if you're going to contribute.
The fact that a computer was assembled or had to be programmed is moot. I was only using it to provide an easily understandable method for generating permutational data. I guess in your case I was wrong. I could just have likely used a natural property like the decay of complex radioactive elements to illustrate the point. I assume you don't have experience of that.
The algorithm is what is in question here. Is it intelligent?
Does it acquire and apply knowledge? No
Does it reason? No
Does it remember? No
Does it process data in any way, shape or form? No
Show me a condition a historical store of data, or any knowledge acquistion with in the code.
Prove, in your own words, Jack, how the algorithm displays intelliegence.
Let us assume that your position is correct and RNA was able to be formed formed self reproducing molecules. The question is could anything usefull come about by natural means with no outside influence? A code would be produced by random and lets just assume the RNA can make protiens too. Very likely that the first protien produced would be useless, although it could possibly form a protien that is usefull but the odds for this are very high. I would not know what the odds are exactly, but I know they would not be good. Lets say the surival of this early form of RNA depends on it making a usefull protien, and if the protien is useless, it will die or barely survive. Lets just say it died. So this would seem to me that more than one RNA mocule had to form on its own, because the error rate would be so high it would take a lot of them using random method of selecting the genic code that would produce usefull protiens, ones it needed to form new cell and live. This to me seems to have great odds against such a possibilty.
Anther possibilty I would urge all to look at, is that the first cell was influenced by outside srouce that was intelligent. That DNA, RNA, and protiens all formed at the same time so that the process of how protiens are formed started off this way. Also that the DNA was influenced as well, so that the protiens it did produce would be usefull to the cell, and it would continue to live on and reporduce. Even cells many consider simple cells andd the first life on earth contained all there elements DNA, RNA, and protiens as well as all the other things you need to translate the code in the DNA into usefull protiens.
Try and keep up, Jack, if you're going to contribute.
The fact that a computer was assembled or had to be programmed is moot. I was only using it to provide an easily understandable method for generating permutational data. I guess in your case I was wrong. I could just have likely used a natural property like the decay of complex radioactive elements to illustrate the point. I assume you don't have experience of that.
The algorithm is what is in question here. Is it intelligent?
Does it acquire and apply knowledge? No
Does it reason? No
Does it remember? No
Does it process data in any way, shape or form? No
Show me a condition a historical store of data, or any knowledge acquistion with in the code.
Prove, in your own words, Jack, how the algorithm displays intelliegence.
This is one thing I know for a fact. With out a human inputing things into the computer, it would as useless as a rock on the ground and would not output anything at all, not even stuff that did not make any sense. I am sure you would all argee with this.
Thus the algorithm need a human. The when programming a computer to do anything, you first have to design the program, and break it down untill you have a detailed list of steps for the computer to follow. Then you code the steps into the computer. Then you debug it, and then you have your algorithm. The algorithm itself need an itelligent source behind it. All though the algorithm could never be intelligent, just like a computer could never be intelligent, it just does what you tell it to do. So you could think of a computer as a mindless slave so to speak.
My major is computer science. Every peice of code I ever wrote, I never considered the code itself to be intelligent. It would be like saying words are intelligent. But for words to have meaning and to be understood, you need intelligence for that.
Originally posted by Jack_www
My major is computer science. Every peice of code I ever wrote, I never considered the code itself to be intelligent. It would be like saying words are intelligent. But for words to have meaning and to be understood, you need intelligence for that.
what needs to have intelligence? the computer, the algorithm or the person processing the data?
Tweet
Comment