Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

2470Re: Re: Cryptic Opinions [was RE: Ways to do it - Take 2]

Expand Messages
  • Shlomi Fish
    May 15, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      On 15 May 2002, Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote:

      > On Wed, 2002-05-15 at 09:44, Shlomi Fish wrote:
      > > On 15 May 2002, Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote:
      > >
      > > > On Wed, 2002-05-15 at 08:05, Shlomi Fish wrote:
      > > > >
      > > > > I fail to understand the two of you. First Guy gives me a cryptic message
      > > > > about "lack of replies". I cannot deduce from it his opinion or what he
      > > > > thinks the opinions of the list are. Then, Arik says "hear hear". And
      > > > > again, I cannot deduce his opinion about Guy's opinion, his opinion about
      > > > > Guy's opinion about the list's opinions, or his opinion about the original
      > > > > posting.
      > > >
      > > > Shlomi,
      > > >
      > > > Have you ever considered taking a Turing test? ;-)
      > >
      > > Does this answer your question? Do you qualify naive or
      > > common-sense-deprived as computer-like?
      > No. I qualify "having trouble parsing communication because unawarness
      > to implicit cues delivering social context" as computer like. Sometimes
      > what humans *don't* say or how they say it is much more important then
      > what they do say.


      > Hackers are nutorious for missing out these sublte cues and getting
      > confused when they fail to parse the explicit communication because of
      > lack of the underlying context.
      > I am not trying to be flame you or some such all, you've asked for a
      > striaght out explenation and that's what I've supplied. As a matter of
      > fact I had the very same problem for a long time and sometiems still do.
      > The good news is you CAN learn this skill.


      In any case, I like explicit and direct communication. I don't believe in
      cues, subtle hints, etc. because they can be misleading, and like you
      said, requires training and an _explicit_ cognitive process of
      interpreting them. If you want to convey a clear message, don't rely on
      any of them. Say what you want to convey, and if you don't - don't wonder
      that people don't understand you or misinterpret you.

      > [ Snipped ... ]
      > > There is no IGLU Cabal! None of them could pass the Turing test. But
      > > stranegely enough a computer program they coded, could.
      > LOL

      Actually, it sounds paradoxical but I'm not sure it is. Somehow, humans
      bootstrap their intelligence and consciousness from the time they are
      babies, in which they are neither. Also, humans developed (or evolved)
      various important cognitive skills, starting at a point that they were far
      less capable. And now we have a hard time instructing a computer to do the


      Shlomi Fish

      > --
      > Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@...>
      > Code mangler, senior coffee drinker and VP SIGSEGV
      > Qlusters ltd.
      > "To err is human. To realy fsck up you need a computer. For
      > those really large scale disastears, an SSI cluster is a must."
      > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > hackers-il-unsubscribe@egroups.com
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

      Shlomi Fish shlomif@...
      Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/
      Home E-mail: shlomif@...

      "Let's suppose you have a table with 2^n cups..."
      "Wait a second - is n a natural number?"
    • Show all 14 messages in this topic