How do you learn new math?

[DaShi]

You have no idea how hard it is to remain civil with you.

Then stop posting pop science BS. If I wanted to argue about that stuff, I'd call my mother.

[Heraclitus]

Then stop posting pop science BS.

You know I have changed my mind in the past when someone provided citations to support his opinion, taking your word especially since you are consistently very hostile to me is a bit much to ask of me right? I know its not your job to educate me, but if you don't feel like debating the points just following me around to put a dunce hat on my head doesn't seem the most healthy way to spend your time, especially if I really do deserve one. Why not formulate clear arguments and back them up with citations for the benefits of people who might be reading this but are just topically ignorant and willing and able to learn or see your way on a point?

God, you're pathetic. KH and Kuci barely deem you worthy of acknowledging most of the time. You should be thanking me for giving you the attention you so desperately crave.

I don't stalk their threads DaShi, you have consistently posted in every thread I've started in the past what, 12 months or so? Yes there are "look at me threads", but honestly this isn't one, or at least wasn't meant as one thought this discussion certainly is dragging it in that way. Also WTF should I care if they notice me or not? Its not my job to be poly's superstar.

[DaShi]

Cause, I have better things to do than waste my time arguing with someone who lacks critical thinking and posts pop and pseudo-science because he thinks it makes him look clever. . If other folks are so interested in the topic, there's plenty of info out there.

[DaShi]

If you're so interested in that stuff, why don't you go to a forum where they regularly discuss them?

You can always come here to talk about eggs.

[Heraclitus]

Cause, I have better things to do than waste my time arguing with someone who lacks critical thinking and posts pop and pseudo-science because he thinks it makes him look clever. . If other folks are so interested in the topic, there's plenty of info out there.

Yes but why waste time with back and forth exchanges of the type we always end up engaging in? At first I tough you got some kind of weird kick out of picking on the bad person who deserves it, however your posts don't seem to flare with the righteous anger they once may have had. Just detached lazy and intentionally sloppy cynicism, criticism and malfeasance, you don't even seem to derive any utility from it, its like an old habit that's stuck there way past its expiration date.

I'm honestly convinced that you do see me as evil and a bad person according to your values, but hey since I'm am not a moral realist (though my recent exploration of Christianity may change this) this is perfectly fine with me. You aren't going to get your friends together and bash my skull in and I won't do the same to you, so its pretty much ok. I also get it that you consider me dishonest, unintelligent and hopelessly shallow tinker. Ok, I get that, really, you've made your point. Repeatedly.

Do something fun, do something profitable. I doubt this is either. Is it supposed to be a giant "WARNING: This post includes tardery, find correct information elsewhere" sing on my factual or logical errors? If so why not at least quote the specific sentence or paragraph containing the falsehood if you are bothering to mark my posts in this fashion?

[Heraclitus]

If you're so interested in that stuff, why don't you go to a forum where they regularly discuss them?

Good point, however for some topics poly still feels like a comfortable old pair of shoes. Also occasional good posts are found at higher frequencies than the average internet forum, also diverse views are represented here which is again rare in most on-line communities which self-segregate.

You can always come here to talk about eggs.

Link or it didn't happen.

[DaShi]

See that thread where I posted a fraction of your me-threads.

[KrazyHorse]

Please elaborate on this.


In the space of all possible or even likely (AI) minds I'm having difficulty seeing humans as anywhere near being the most unique in any possible aptitude or appreciation of math I can think of.

Good Lord.

a) We've never met any other type of mind
b) If and when we create AI minds, they will be fundamentally human creations
c) Until we are surrounded by space aliens and berzerkers, the relevant comparison is between humans and animals

[KrazyHorse]

And would one looking at the human animal today come to the conculsion that math is the most human endeavour?

Yes.

[KrazyHorse]

Humans don't think in quantifiable values. At least not really, not without a lot of training. A good example is if you ask people how probable a even is. You are going to hear a disproportionate number of estimates landing at 0-5%, 50% and 99-100%. We mostly think in very unlikely, maybe and certain.

Good ****ing God.

This has nothing to do with human beings not being mathematical. This has to do with the fact that PROBABILITY DOESN'T REALLY EXIST WHEN APPLIED TO REAL WORLD PROBLEMS.

Only in cases where the problem AND ALL THE INFORMATION SURROUNDING IT is precisely defined is it possible to get a meaningful answer for probabilities.

[KrazyHorse]

Not by intuition but don't sleep on the growing academic interest in behavioral economics.

And how do behavioral economists come to their conclusions, you twit?

[MikeH]

Statistics isn't really maths either. It's an abomination.

[Cort Haus]

KH - thanks for that explanation. (#41) I shall refer to it again when I revisit the stats stuff.

[Heraclitus]

Good Lord.

a) We've never met any other type of mind

Perhaps a implicit platonic form fallacy on my part, but I would prefer a definition of the most human endeavor that would stand true for as long a part of the history of homo sapiens and for as many of its members as possible. Most of human history we never did anything comparable to real math and in a few decades/centuries/millennia we can confidently predict that there will be minds or mind-like processes that will beat us by miles.

b) If and when we create AI minds, they will be fundamentally human creations

This is technically true. But why is this relevant right now? I hope you aren't arguing that a self improving AI is likley to keep "our way of thinking" or "our way of thinking on steroids" for long (in the unlikely event we get AI by reverse engineering the human mind), let alone our values or goals.

Sure humans will create a AI, but where it will go after we make it is so beyond our grasp you can't really claim to know we will impart anything identifiable as being something "human","humane" or "human like".

Good Lord.
c) Until we are surrounded by space aliens and berzerkers, the relevant comparison is between humans and animals

I suppose, but my argument is that we know that we will eventually make aliens if we don't die off and we also know its likley not to be that far off, why not take this into account when defining the "most human endeavor".

Yes.

I could have sworn our social intelligence and unique ease at sharing and transmitting mems was what was the most interesting, unique and yes typically "human" feature of this particular survive & replicate machine and what was ultimate that helped us do so much more with our toolmaking abilities than say Chimpanzees or Otters.

Note: Yes I realize this criticism obviously isn't compatible with the general spirit of my "potential mindspace" concern about the most human endeavor.

[Heraclitus]

Good ****ing God.

This has nothing to do with human beings not being mathematical. This has to do with the fact that PROBABILITY DOESN'T REALLY EXIST WHEN APPLIED TO REAL WORLD PROBLEMS.

Only in cases where the problem AND ALL THE INFORMATION SURROUNDING IT is precisely defined is it possible to get a meaningful answer for probabilities.

But shouldn't we be a bit better at quantifying our hunches?