|
Evolving Phrases |
Wetimer
Member #1,622
November 2001
|
Hmm... All the phrases died again... I'll have to think of a better way of doing that... Re: Current lifetime. Stats: Quote: I know you were probably kidding, but as with Karadoc, that exact statement always makes me angry. The reason is that `Evolution is a theory' has a specific meaning, it is a scientific theory, not a random idea. It's the same thing as saying hey, it's only science, so no reason to belief any of it! well, the point is that its a theory, which is essentially our current best guess at how to explain the evidence. We may one day come up with a better guess which fits the evidence better, just like Einstin did for Newton. Quote: I had some fun on the page, but it's fairly hard to pick which of the five options makes most sense because to the naked eye, none of them do. A computer programme as Dawkins describes, which just evolves to a single specific target, is probably better at this. It's better at achieving that specific target, the reason I didn't do that, besides the fact its already been done , is that Evolution isn't comparing one organism to the final organism its trying to produce. It can only compare one organism to another like what you are doing in this program. Quote: Oh, one suggestion: spaces seem not to be an allowed character. I think they should be. They are supposed to be... Some of the phrases have spaces, it just doesn't appear to be as common as I'd expect. At any rate, thanks for participating in my odd hobby of simulating evolution... Oh, one suggestion: spaces seem not to be an allowed character. I think they should be. <code>if(Windows.State = Crash) Computer.halt();</code> |
Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
|
Quote: Evolution is only a theory, it is not fact. But so is religion Its full of guesswork and more superstition than you can shake a stick at. -- |
Billybob
Member #3,136
January 2003
|
Darn religion.
|
gnolam
Member #2,030
March 2002
|
No, religion is not a theory. Where's the falsifiability? The testable predictions? A theory in the scientific sense is more than "just a guess"... -- |
Kanzure
Member #3,669
July 2003
|
Quote: No, religion is not a theory. Indeed, but it acts like it is one. "You can't prove that this theory is wrong!" "Then it's not a theory.. what the heck is it?". |
Chris Katko
Member #1,881
January 2002
|
the definition of theory said: a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; "theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses"; "true in fact and theory" Though, I find it amazing that you guys are so obsessed with making everyone know your stance on the issue of religion. Do you honestly believe everyone must think exactly like you? Do you honestly believe you know more than everyone else? Or is it more of an emotional issue? You feel so hurt that you must attempt to harm others to make yourself feel better? You already know (or at least should know) that nothing you say will actually change anyone's stance. People have devoted their lives to the issue (that is, more time than you) and come to different conclusions (be it yay, or nay). Don't assume you know all the facts. Get over yourselves and find something more interesting and productive to talk about; I'm sick and tired of listening to this dribble day after day. -----sig: |
Billybob
Member #3,136
January 2003
|
Chris, you do realise you're doing the exact same thing? People talk about stuff and things. It happens.
|
Kanzure
Member #3,669
July 2003
|
Quote: People have devoted their lives to the issue (that is, more time than you) and come to different conclusions (be it yay, or nay). Don't assume you know all the facts. Get over yourselves and find something more interesting and productive to talk about; I'm sick and tired of listening to this dribble day after day. You must realize that this is not the majority our lives. This is a form of escape from our lives, we post here for entertainment (among other things, I enjoy discussions). Don't tell me if this is or is not productive; You do not know of the goals to which I am judging my productivity by. |
Karadoc ~~
Member #2,749
September 2002
|
Quote: Though, I find it amazing that you guys are so obsessed with making everyone know your stance on the issue of religion. Do you honestly believe everyone must think exactly like you? Do you honestly believe you know more than everyone else? Or is it more of an emotional issue? You feel so hurt that you must attempt to harm others to make yourself feel better? You already know (or at least should know) that nothing you say will actually change anyone's stance. People have devoted their lives to the issue (that is, more time than you) and come to different conclusions (be it yay, or nay). Don't assume you know all the facts. Get over yourselves and find something more interesting and productive to talk about; I'm sick and tired of listening to this dribble day after day. But you are doing just the same thing. Questions like "Do you honestly believe everyone must think exactly like you?" are insulting. Do you honestly believe that that is what we believe!? Chris Katko, what do you think? Should we all stop being so self centred and listen to you? ----------- |
Billybob
Member #3,136
January 2003
|
Do you honestly believe that I believe what you believe is what I believed when you believed that I believed what you believed?
|
Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
|
WH: yes. -- |
Karadoc ~~
Member #2,749
September 2002
|
Quote: Do you honestly believe that I believe what you believe is what I believed when you believed that I believed what you believed? I never believed that you believed what I believe! So I can hardly answer your question. ----------- |
Soga
Member #4,589
May 2004
|
Religion is a delicate subject. Best not to bring it up with others. You can lose a friend over religion. |
Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
|
You can loose your life over religion. -- |
Karadoc ~~
Member #2,749
September 2002
|
Yep. Wars have been fought over religion. ----------- |
Billybob
Member #3,136
January 2003
|
Quote: Just think, two groups of people with incompatible beliefs who are both so damn sure of themselves that they would give up their own lives to destroy the other side.
Wife/Husband swap! Anyway, back on track. I think it'd be way cooler to "train" a program that spews out english text.
|
Trezker
Member #1,739
December 2001
|
The funniest thing is that most religions are very compatible. I think there's another thread more suited for religous flamewar though, unless Matthew has come back and locked it. |
Chris Katko
Member #1,881
January 2002
|
Quote: But you are doing just the same thing. Not really. I don't go around yelling "God exists, turn or burn!" Whereas, quite a few people have blatently said "Your religion is wrong, and if you don't believe me, you're retarded." Quote: Back in my post, I basically said "If the topic of evolution comes up, just keep religion out of it, OK?" I have no problem whatsoever with evolution and keeping religion out of it. I'm talking about the not-so-subtle religion bashing that goes on seemingly forever. My post was also part venting. As I'm truely fed up with people telling me that I'm (and others are) "wrong." Quote: Now you are saying "stop posting your thoughts about religion!" (more or less). No, I'm saying stop telling people that their religion is wrong, especially considering how little most people here even know about other people's religions. Quote: Questions like "Do you honestly believe everyone must think exactly like you?" are insulting. Do you honestly believe that that is what we believe!? A few of you, yes! Which is why I'm fed up with it. I probably shouldn't have posted the last one. But I couldn't help it. -----sig: |
X-G
Member #856
December 2000
|
Quote: I'm talking about the not-so-subtle religion bashing that goes on seemingly forever. Yes, a curse on critical thinking and science! This constant, but ever so subtle, process that indirectly points out flaws in superstitious thinking must be stopped, for it is biased indeed! Burn the heathens! Wait, I mean, er... -- |
Kanzure
Member #3,669
July 2003
|
But why be logical when computers obviously do that part for you?!?! |
Karadoc ~~
Member #2,749
September 2002
|
Quote: Quote: --- So the people who are saying such-and-such religion is right is ok with you, but the people who are saying it's wrong are bad? In other words, you have a passive pro-religion stance. ----------- |
Billybob
Member #3,136
January 2003
|
Quote: Darn religion.
Now, I'm pretty sure we can all agree to that and move back on topic.
|
Karadoc ~~
Member #2,749
September 2002
|
Back on topic: I tried to evolve some AI to play the number guessing game once. You know; guess a number between 0 and 30, then I say higher or lower until you get the number (or until I guess sick of you getting it wrong). static int guess = 0; guess+=3; return guess; Which scored pretty well, but obviously isn't very smart. They only ever then evolved into variations on that. Like starting at the maximum and counting downwards, or counting up by 4 instead of 3. The range in each game (the upper bound of the correct number) was random, but if I changed the range that upper bound could take, the AIs would evolve to a more suitable counting index, but that's it. It is easy to get the that simple AI, and that simple AI is pretty good, but the problem is that the next better solution is so completely different from what they already had that they never find it. As soon as they break away from their incrementing guesses, then they don't score as well and start dieing off before they reach the next best solution. It's been a few years since I did all that, I've got some new ideas on evolutionary programming now. One day I'll try them out, and I hope I can get something a bit smarter! ----------- |
Billybob
Member #3,136
January 2003
|
Quote: As soon as they break away from their incrementing guesses, then they don't score as well and start dieing off before they reach the next best solution. And there in lies the problem. You should promote higher scores, but not discourage lower scores. You can't just kill something because it isn't preforming well, because otherwise, as you see, they don't preform well. But that creates an intersting problem. If you can't kill anything then it's going to start sucking up resources very fast. But, ya know, it happens. Better than programs that don't evolve at all. Quote: In programming, evolution is pretty hard. I mean, slipping a goto into the middle of a piece of code is only a small mutation, but it can completely change what the program does. Same for DNA. A lil' radiation and you end up with 3 eyes or 3 legs.
|
Torbjörn Josefsson
Member #1,048
September 2000
|
I really don't think 'guessing games' are a good domain for GA - unless it develops psychic powers - what's the point of rewarding it for guessing right the first time, for example? BTW: In a thousand years scientology might be as respected as christianity, and they'll probably have cleared away the most blatantly insane parts of it
-- |
|
|