[Heartlogic-dev] RE: FW: Research in emotional AI

[Josh White]

> > preference is to think about the problem myself instead of
delegating 
> > that task to a "smart" computer.
> 
> I disagree.  But we can work on that issue in time....Ah 
> 
> I believe that we are collecting data at the website to maybe 
> help us give feedback to a learning algorithm.  

That's a good point and I agree it's a cool thing about your website.

> it, or some combo of the two.  But what is an important aid 
> to doing either one of those is having a set of data that can 
> evaluate a given model (whether that model is created by a 
> human mind or in silico).

With that in mind, maybe an Java API to access the data, along with a
challenge to all comers a la Turing, would be a cool next step.

> >
> > If you still believe that any of these "smart algorithms" are really

> > smart then I strongly encourage you to implement them in C.

I don't believe any existing algorithm are really smart, in the sense
that they could even remotely compete with a human brain.  

The "you can only understand it if you build it" answer sounded
defensive to me. 
I do think building something makes sense if one has a deep or enduring
an interest in the field.  Since I had already told you I'm a
semi-layman I assumed you knew that I'm talking to experts like you
because I'm looking to learn about the field generally, and get a broad,
reasonably accurate understanding of the current state of AI.  In that
context, it sounded like a defensive answer to me.

Personally, I'm happy if I help (even slightly) create an advance in AI
that could be applied in the next 2 years to greatly improve a product
or service normal people want or need.  I think lots of scientific
problems - say emulation of human emotion - is great, very applicable to
lots of real-world problems.  I think AI is currently not there, but
that it could be soon (but I'm not sure - again, hence the queries).  

As you've seen, I'm interested in neural nets.  I understand neural nets
on a shallow level. I've used a few simple neural net demos and
understand how weighting a simple static neural network simulates basic
neural pathway construction and thus crude "learning".
        I don't understand the limits of neural nets. For example, it
seems obvious to add self-modifying weighting to any number of other
attributes of the data in the neural net, such as timing of signals,
number of connections, types of signals transmitted, etc. I don't know
why that doesn't work (if it's been done, which I assume it has).  Do
you think that neural net could never be theoretically equivalent in
functionality to a human brain?  
        Perhaps these questions are too basic to interest you. If so,
can one of you point me to a good 'advanced beginner' guide to neural
nets and other learning algorithms - ie a good deep FAQ?  

Thanks,
-Josh