RE: [Heartlogic-dev] new idea (fwd)

[Josh White]

> 
> > It would be cleaner to pay participants a token amount of money to 
> > participate - I think that will greatly improve the quality because 
> > people feel like they're working, not like they're entertaining 
> > themselves.
> 
> Interesting.  Well, I'm open to the idea of paying subjects but have 
> limited funds.  I suggest we keep pushing forward, try to get 
> some mock 
> ups, see what kinds of results we can get for free and then 
> start paying 
> as we need to, once the design is production level/good science.

Yeah, I'm not surprised paying people wasn't a real option, at least not
right now. 

> > - add a personality to the AI - name, sex, etc.  I think HAL is 
> > perfect, but whatever.
> 
> HAL sounds excellent to me.  I wonder if there is some sort 
> of legal issue associated with using that name?  I doubt it's 
> trademarked.  So lets just keep going and ask the next 
> attorney friend we happen to bump into.  

Agreed. No big penalty for us if we have to change it at some point.

> And I had a five point rating scale - highly unbelievable, 
> unbelievable, neutral, believable, highly believable.  But, I 
> think we should keep it simple so, yes it should be 
> true/false for now.  We can experiment with finer gradations later.

I don't think a 5-point scale will hurt the experience.  I just threw in
true/false quickly.

> Note that many of the things they will be rating will be 
> simple "gafs" i.e. ground atomic formulae, such as "The 
> Danube is a river." and these things do not have a 
> complicated justification.  So, instead of ...

The justification isn't necessary at all - we could skip it for simple cases
that are hard-coded.  Example page:

 ---------------------------
You said HAL was right to say "The Danube is a river." 

4 out of 5 humans agreed with your answer so HAL is now 80% confident of
that statement.

HAL also thinks Paris is in France.  

 [] Definitely true [] somewhat true [] neutral [] ....

----------------


> ...Also, note that many (half?) of the items they will be 
> rating will be reversed.  

I don't imagine that will be a problem for the user.  

This designing part is fun!  :)

-Josh