From: janburse@fastmail.fm   
      
   Hi,   
      
   Now replace "machine" by "bioform", and "think"   
   by "life" in the Turing Test, and you get the   
   Gladiator Test. The judgement is not by a single   
      
   counterpart behind a teletype, but a crowd,   
   we could invoke the image of a Hollywood thumbs-up or   
   thumbs-down gesture as signalling a yes or no.   
      
   Source:   
      
   Adrian Tchaikovsky   
   Dogs of War   
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogs_of_War_(2017_novel)   
      
   How Tchaikovsky’s deepens the Turing Analogy   
      
   - From "Can it think?" to "Does it suffer? Does   
   it deserve to live?" Turing’s test is about cognitive   
   performance. The bioforms’ struggle is about moral   
   standing. Their "Turing Test" isn’t to prove   
   intelligence (they are clearly intelligent), but   
   to prove consciousness, sentience, and intrinsic   
   value to a society that legally defines them as "equipment."   
      
   - The Crowd is the Global Public & Legal System   
   In the novel, the "crowd" isn't just a Roman audience—it's   
   the court of public opinion, international law, media,   
   and corporate boardrooms. The question is whether this   
   "crowd" will show mercy (granting personhood) or   
   condemn them to remain weapons.   
      
   Etc.. Etc..   
      
   Have Fun!   
      
   Bye   
      
   Mild Shock schrieb:   
   > Hi,   
   >   
   > How to spot a failed coping with AI?   
   > Very easy, if somebody starts some gibberish   
   > about consciousness you can be sure he is clueless:   
   >   
   > Are AI minds genuine minds?   
   > A genuine mind is typically associated with   
   > consciousness, self-awareness, intentionality,   
   > and the capacity to experience mental states such as emotions.   
   > https://events.rice.edu/event/416255-moshe-vardi-world-logic-day-lecture   
   >   
   > What will be Moshe Vardi conclusion nowadays,   
   > that self programming is a first form of   
   > inner monologue? Well I guess the GPUs have   
   >   
   > termal activity either way, who cares?   
   >   
   > LoL   
   >   
   > Bye   
   >   
   > P.S.: Just observe how clever Alan Turing was:   
   > He writes near the beginning of the paper:   
   >   
   > “I propose to consider the question, ‘Can machines   
   > think?’ This should begin with definitions of the   
   > meaning of the terms ‘machine’ and ‘think.’”   
   >   
   > To avoid endless philosophical debate, he replaces   
   > it with the imitation game.   
   >   
   > Key points:   
   > - Word usage — Turing does not use the word “consciousness”   
   > in the paper as a criterion for the test.   
   >   
   > - Intent — He wanted to sidestep debates about   
   > inner experience and focus on observable behavior.   
   >   
   > - Later interpretations — Many later philosophers   
   > and AI critics have connected the Turing Test to   
   > questions of consciousness, but this is a re-   
   > interpretation or extension of Turing’s original proposal.   
   >   
   > So, while the Turing Test is often brought into   
   > discussions of machine consciousness, Turing himself   
   > did not mention it in that context in his 1950 paper.   
   >   
   > Mild Shock schrieb:   
   >> Hi,   
   >>   
   >> No joke, I have a new CLP heuristic coded,   
   >> and made a blind test. Explaind to the AI   
   >> what I coded, but not how coded it,   
   >>   
   >> omitted the crucial scoring function, and   
   >> the AI was exactly proposing this scoring   
   >> funcion out of the blue.   
   >>   
   >> I was quite bamboozled. The AI could not tell   
   >> me how it recalled or halucinated the formula,   
   >> I spent like 1-2 hours trying to find a   
   >>   
   >> precedent paper. Will blog about it later.   
   >> So whats going on . Why can AI suddently   
   >> propose Heuristics. Because they are now   
   >>   
   >> differently trained:   
   >>   
   >> Phase 1: Early LLMs (~2018–2020)   
   >> Phase 2: LLMs with Prompted Reasoning (~2020–2022)   
   >> Phase 3: Scaling & Reasoning Engineering (~2023–2025)   
   >>   
   >> Training an AI to look for heuristics,   
   >> can help in self programming. The generative   
   >> part of the AI would generate some code,   
   >>   
   >> which then the AI would use for itself. See also:   
   >>   
   >> How it started:   
   >>   
   >> AI for Low-Code for AI   
   >> Nikitha Rao, Jason Tsay, Kiran Kate,   
   >> Vincent J. Hellendoorn, Martin Hirzel - 2023   
   >> https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.20015   
   >>   
   >> How its going:   
   >>   
   >> Successor-Generator Planning with LLM-generated Heuristics   
   >> Alexander Tuisov1, Yonatan Vernik2,   
   >> Alexander Shleyfman - 2024   
   >> https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.18784v4   
   >>   
   >> Bye   
   >>   
   >> Mild Shock schrieb:   
   >>> Hi,   
   >>>   
   >>> Good Morning Vietnam, the HPC-AI Convergence   
   >>> doesn't sleep. Here a friendly reminder of   
   >>> the Sudoku leader board (Topn87 Challenge):   
   >>>   
   >>> #1: jczsolve / Rust WASM   
   >>>      Solving 87 Sudokus in 0.006 seconds (0 sec / Sudoku)   
   >>>      https://emerentius.github.io/sudoku_web/   
   >>>   
   >>> #2: Kudoku / JavaScript   
   >>>      Solving 87 Sudokus in 0.043 seconds (0.0004 sec / Sudoku)   
   >>>      https://attractivechaos.github.io/plb/kudoku.html   
   >>>   
   >>> #3: Picat / import cp. solve([ff],L)   
   >>>      CPU time 0.175 seconds   
   >>>      https://picat-lang.org/   
   >>>   
   >>> #4: Picat / import sat. solve(L)   
   >>>      CPU time 0.373 seconds   
   >>>      https://fmv.jku.at/kissat/   
   >>>   
   >>> Tested on Windows 11, with a AMD Ryzen AI 350   
   >>>   
   >>> Didn't test yet GNU Prolog, ECLiPSe Prolog or   
   >>> Ciao Prolog. So whats next? Well beat #1 by   
   >>> tapping into an NPU of Copilot+ PC.   
   >>>   
   >>> Have Fun!   
   >>>   
   >>> Its Winner Winner Chicken Dinner time again...   
   >>>   
   >>> Bye   
   >>   
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)