So fucking tired of bullshitters!!!PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 6:40 pm Now that we have ChatGPT it is possible to automate the otherwise infeasibly large task
of populating a knowledge ontology with the set of general analytic knowledge.
Your ignorance of the subject matter does not count as any sort of rebuttal.
A proof of G in F
Re: A proof of G in F
Re: A proof of G in F
So you are saying it's infeasible to go about the way you are going about it...By manually entering the data into the computers.PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 6:59 pm It took Doug Lenat's team at least 700 labor years to manually populate his CYC project
with the tiny subset of analytical knowledge known as common sense. If we are very
generous and say that this is 1/10 of 1% of all knowledge then it would take twice as
long as the existence of Homo Sapians for one person to manually populate the knowledge
ontology that you refer to.
We know. That's why we are using machine learning.
-
- Posts: 1557
- Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2016 6:55 pm
Re: A proof of G in F
I already said that ChatGPT merely estimates that it is very likely that baby kittens are not any type of ten story office building. I also stated that Steve Wolfram was able to force ChatGPT to use deductive inference. Ignoring what I say proves insincerity on your part.Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 7:02 pmSo fucking tired of bullshitters!!!PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 6:40 pm Now that we have ChatGPT it is possible to automate the otherwise infeasibly large task
of populating a knowledge ontology with the set of general analytic knowledge.
Your ignorance of the subject matter does not count as any sort of rebuttal.
gpt.png
-
- Posts: 1557
- Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2016 6:55 pm
Re: A proof of G in F
Yes that is correct.Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 7:11 pmSo you are saying it's infeasible to go about the way you are going about it...By manually entering the data into the computers.PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 6:59 pm It took Doug Lenat's team at least 700 labor years to manually populate his CYC project
with the tiny subset of analytical knowledge known as common sense. If we are very
generous and say that this is 1/10 of 1% of all knowledge then it would take twice as
long as the existence of Homo Sapians for one person to manually populate the knowledge
ontology that you refer to.
We know. That's why we are using machine learning.
Re: A proof of G in F
So tired of bullshitters.PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 7:34 pm I already said that ChatGPT merely estimates that it is very likely that baby kittens are not any type of ten story office building. I also stated that Steve Wolfram was able to force ChatGPT to use deductive inference. Ignoring what I say proves insincerity on your part.
What do theorems and proofs in formal systems have to do with ChatGPT?
Re: A proof of G in F
So tired of bullshitters.PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 7:35 pmYes that is correct.Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 7:11 pmSo you are saying it's infeasible to go about the way you are going about it...By manually entering the data into the computers.PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 6:59 pm It took Doug Lenat's team at least 700 labor years to manually populate his CYC project
with the tiny subset of analytical knowledge known as common sense. If we are very
generous and say that this is 1/10 of 1% of all knowledge then it would take twice as
long as the existence of Homo Sapians for one person to manually populate the knowledge
ontology that you refer to.
We know. That's why we are using machine learning.
https://developers.google.com/machine-l ... e/ml-intro
Starting @ 2:15
Machine learning changes the way you think about a problem. Software engineers are trained to think logically and mathematically. We use assertions to prove properties of our programs are correct. With machine learning the focus shifts from a mathematical science to a natural science. We are making observations about an uncertain world, running experiments, using statistics not logic to analyze the result of the experiment
-
- Posts: 1557
- Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2016 6:55 pm
Re: A proof of G in F
Wolfram was able to force ChatGPT to use deductive inference.Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 7:47 pmSo tired of bullshitters.PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 7:34 pm I already said that ChatGPT merely estimates that it is very likely that baby kittens are not any type of ten story office building. I also stated that Steve Wolfram was able to force ChatGPT to use deductive inference. Ignoring what I say proves insincerity on your part.
What do theorems and proofs in formal systems have to do with ChatGPT?
Wolfram was able to force ChatGPT to use deductive inference.
Wolfram was able to force ChatGPT to use deductive inference.
Wolfram was able to force ChatGPT to use deductive inference.
Re: A proof of G in F
So what, idiot.PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 8:05 pm Wolfram was able to force ChatGPT to use deductive inference.
Wolfram was able to force ChatGPT to use deductive inference.
Wolfram was able to force ChatGPT to use deductive inference.
Wolfram was able to force ChatGPT to use deductive inference.
ChatGPT can make inferences based on any knowledge. Irrespective the source.