TuringAI

Someone where? I don't see any comments.

And that would be... all of them? Seriously though, sounds like he's just going to replace some government programs with other government programs.

I can't load the site. It saying it doesn't exist or something. Do I need a proxy or is the site down?

Like this guy?

And a driver has a right to be secure against assault by other drivers who are too busy fiddling with their GPS to pay attention to the road. Should we ban using GPS while driving?

Why is it such a big deal? I mean, why get the government involved if there is no initiation of force?

Hate Crimes are often hard to prove without Hate Crime legislation. So the interest here isn't in punishing thought, but in making justice more available to victims of said type of crimes.

What happens when the crime is not committed by any person who can be identified any other way than by the fact that they hated the group to which the individual that they killed happened to belong? Hate crime legislation does fill a gap in standard policing techniques. Hate crimes are harder to enforce and prosecute, and while I think we could come up with a broader abstraction to deal with crimes that, by nature, are harder to enforce and prosecute, it is useful to have hate crime legislation on the books.

Then how do you explain that intellectual property applies less to things that fewer people (IE only you) value and more to things that many people (or people in general) value?

Would that make her Extra Virgin Olive Oil? Edit: Dang, someone beat me to the punch. XP Wait, if we didn't know about good and evil, then how were we supposed to know it was so bad to eat from that tree?

Well I apologize for not being clear. I will start with the simple question. I came up with this concept because I wanted to know if I could come up with a way to represent sets in binary. Then I realized that sets were too general in some aspects and too specific in other aspects, so I created groupings, a type of lists. I don't think I want to call them groupings though... too similar to groups. I am trying right now to give a definition of my list in terms that people not as familiar with mathematics can understand. For starters, there were the four given. I can re-explain those if so desired. 01 is a binary representation of a grouping. The grouping here is the empty list. It exists but does not refer to anything, and in this context it is not something to which some other thing refers. The 0 represents that it's empty, and the 1 represents its completion since nothing refers to it. 0011 is another one, but a tad more complex. The 01 there in the middle isn't the same as above. Instead, it's saying "There is a list with one element". The 0 to its left is the list of zero elements to which it refers. The 1 to its right is, again, its completion. 000111 is a list of two empty lists. The 011 means "There is a list of two elements". You can tell because, aside from the last 1, there are two 1s next to that zero. The two zeroes to the left are the elements, empty lists. And again, the 1 on the right is to avoid confusion. 001011 is a list of a list of an empty list. Instead of the first 01 referring to a 0, it refers to another 01 which itself refers to a 0. The 1 serves the obvious purpose here as it did before. Two things I should explain. One is that there is a zero next to the 1s that separates the list and its elements. The reason for that should be obvious, as otherwise we'd be confused by something as simple as 0011. Does that 1 on the right refer to the 001, or is it part of the 11? A similar thing is noted about the 1 at the end. This is simply there because reading it left to right, we need to know where the sequence terminates. Also, even right to left it's needed as a default digit that assures us that we're starting in the right place. Currently I cannot reference any concretes that this represents. It is a higher level abstraction that can possibly have some use in representing any tree like structure. In fact, that there is a binary representation of a treelike structure is the point. A treelike structure would be like evolutionary paths, or other kinds of decision trees.

It's easier to imagine visually. It's basically a tree with a finite number of nodes, or a finite series of line segments or a point, depending on how trivial you want to be. For example 00100100101111 is a tree which has a point at the beginning, branches off into three, and each of the three branches just continues linearly for a whole segment, but no more. So there is one beginning node and three end nodes, and three middle nodes. If you'd like I could draw a picture.

A grouping is an n-member list, where each member is also an n-member list, where any particular n can be 0 and where the total number of lists is finite. That would be a fairly decent definition. Given this definition, each 'grouping' can, for instance, be represented as a series of 0s and 1s whereupon the number of 0s and 1s is equal. It can also be represented like a tree. It can also be represented with "(" ")" "_" and ","as symbols. You can also represent it in words. My preferred method is 0s and 1s. A null list, a list of no lists, would be represented as 01. The 0 means the list is empty and the 1 following it means that the sequence terminates. A list of the null list would be represented as 0011. The 01 is the list OF some list, and the 0 is the list that serves as its sole element. A list of two null lists would be represented as 000111. A list of a list of the null list would be represented as 001011. You can see why I have a 1 at the end. It's a contextual indicator so that you know when the list isn't itself considered an element of another list. I'm not sure what purpose this abstraction serves except as an abstraction, so that tree structures can be put into 0s and 1s for the purpose of being used by a Turing Machine. As with most math these days, people will find a use after it's already been studied enough for it to be understood.

I've decided to call these 'groupings' referent chain lists, or RCLs, for short. I've figured out (but with no 'proof') that to make a turing machine work with the data you have to have the data entered correctly and the pointer has to be on the very last 1 instead of the very first 0. There's no way to tell if it hasn't been entered correctly so it is just assumed. Either it goes too far to the left and jams, or it doesn't go far enough to the left and it misses some digits. Now I've downloaded a turing machine program, probably not the best one, but the only one available, and I'm going to try to see if I can at the very least count how many 1s and 0s there are.

Okay, now I am in the process of trying to see if there is a way to make a multiple-state two-symbol Turing Machine that will be able to do any kind of meaningful operations on the groupings (which, in retrospect, should have been called something else) which does not destroy any information. Wish me luck!

I imagine that everyone here has heard of set theory. Well I've conceived of another kind of set-like object and I can explain it but I don't know what it's called, so I will call it groupings. A grouping is related to sets in a number of ways, but they differ in that with sets you can't have two of the same element, but with groupings you can, and with sets the order doesn't matter, but with groupings it does. Also true is that with sets you can have any number of elements, but with groupings while there is no finite limit they can't be infinite. This next point is perhaps the essential point: With sets you don't know what is going to be in the set, whereas with groupings you know it can be either another grouping or a blank character. If you don't understand, I will show you. A set is like {1,2,{4,9},12,...}. A grouping is like {,{},{,,},{}}. Now I have this nice way of representing groupings as a number in binary. Any blank character is represented as a 0. Any set is represented by a 0 and then a number of 1s depending on how many elements (blank characters or groupings) there are. For example, a grouping with one blank character is 001, a grouping with two blank characters is 00011, and so on. Now, finally, once we have the outermost grouping you add a 1 at the end to indicate that it is not inside anything else. So let's say you have a grouping as such: {,,{}}. You would represent it in binary as 0000101111. Now it's quite obvious that the blank character can be taken as a grouping with no elements, so let's call it the empty grouping. Then groupings only contain other groupings, whether this grouping is empty or non-empty. Also notice how that which is in a grouping is always to the left of that grouping. The thing I discovered is not only can any grouping with finite recursion be represented in binary, but the only rule that has to be obeyed for the binary representation to be proper is that the number of 0s match up with the number of 1s. I will explain why this is so if anybody wants to hear the reason. Addendum: Another thing is that any grouping must start with a 0 and end with a 1; and in between, reading from left to right, the 1s must be exhausted before the 0s are exhausted. I forgot to mention that. Ooops. PS: I know that the language is ambiguous, but bear with me. Let me at least clarify now that any WHOLE groupings must have the same number of 0s and 1s whereas any PARTIAL groupings won't, and in fact they'll be different in the number of 0s and 1s, where the 0s will outnumber the 1s by a single digit.

Well, anyone who commits rights violations against other people deserves prison. Those whose actions do not harm others do not, and if any extra attention is spent on putting them away, the responsibility lies with government, not the citizens committing the act, for any damage done against the war effort.

On what basis do you make the judgment that we should consider that treason? On the basis that "it is an action that, considering a comparison of the action vs not the action, the consequence probably helps the enemy"? Surely then by this standard using gas guzzling cars is treason, since the oil profets go to OPEC, which go to terrorism-sponsering fundamentalist nations, which are our enemies. If you use any other basis for a reason to consider it treason then the conclusion doesn't follow. Therefore, you're either illogical, or even more illogical. I suggest recanting your position.

It wouldn't "explode". Decay is more like it. The only 'explosion' that would happen is at the quantum black hole limit level.

Well, 12 is when people have learned how to focus on the abstract. It's called The Formal Operation Stage. That's when it begins, so that's when testing should begin. The testing process shouldn't be so easy that your average 12 year old will pass of course. The intellect of the student should determine how fast he or she progresses, and there should be different parts which depend on different kind of knowledge. There would be written and oral types of quizzing as well as performance testing. Of course certain things will have certain other things as prerequisites. This testing should go all through 12-24, because some people, particularly those with handicaps, won't be able to live on their own at 18 regardless of parenting method. There of course would be opt-outs based on agreement of parents and the offspring vying for adulthood which could occur at 18. This of course is a radical change and most people in this country would not want it. So this is one of the last things we would aim to change about society. However it's still one of the things that would eventually have to change.

I understand your point too. I think that it is incumbent upon the child to prove that he or she is mature if he or she is to be emancipated, and it is incumbent on the parents not to get in the way except when the child is in danger of hurting themselves or others. It is also incumbent upon the government to set up OBJECTIVE procedures for allowing a child to prove such. Also, if the child is so inept at age 18, when they become an adult legally, that they cannot live on their own, and they can prove it, and they can prove that it was a consequence of their parent's action or inaction, they should have a right to sue for however much support is needed. Child abuse/neglect should be treated seriously in this country.

You are dropping context. We can know how the universe is NOW and make extrapolations for how it was from the Big Bang to that point, but by definition the Big Bang was the condition of the universe being in it's least entropy state with respect to entities and with all the same laws of physics we have now. Entropy always increases in a closed system. To say that it doesn't is a violation of the laws of thermodynamics, and thus physics. If entropy, and thus physics, were different it would have to be a pre Big Bang event. There is a finite amount of entropy because entropy corresponds to information. There is not an infinite amount of things going on in this universe. Because of this, any time in the future there would have to be more entropy and any time in the past there would have to be less. Now you can't have less than zero entropy, not in the cosmos we know now with the laws of physics we have, therefore there has to be a point at which the universe changed. I suspect the universe was relatively static before the big bang and not dynamic as it is now. If what you say is true, that is NOT an arbitrary claim. It may be true or it may be false. Furthermore, it can be modeled consistently such that there appears to be an origin of time and space. That's been proven and is based on mathematical modeling and scientific fact. At the point of origin, we don't know. Our mathematical and scientific models can't figure out what a singularity is since we have never seen one and thus would have no basis for differentiation and integration of that concept.

Well they're the ones who accepted the money. Furthermore, they can always use the money to produce things by offering it to those who WOULD want the services money could buy. That's how trade works. You choose whether or not to make exchanges and are responsible for your own benefit, which is the only way mutual benefit can happen. That doesn't mean it guarantees mutual benefit, but mutual benefit cannot exist without it.

Those are great. I find the first one the most interesting. Apparently the child is amused that things which 'are whole' can be taken apart.

Well the thing about that is that if we sell the services to other countries we could repay the debt. The problem is probably regulation occurring in international service trades. That and those other countries are often corrupt and people WOULD rather sell services to the populace, but can't due to regulation in those other countries. What we need to do is stand firm and say that we don't owe them squat until they privatize and deregulate their economic actions. After all, how can we be expected to repay when they refuse to buy from us what we have and are willing to offer?