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

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

Expand Messages
  • Shlomi Fish
    ... Sure I did. I sat at one point of an IRC channel, and someone tested me. Eventually it was discovered that I am a computer, but it turned out the
    Message 1 of 14 , May 14, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      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? ;-)
      >

      <sarcasm>
      Sure I did. I sat at one point of an IRC channel, and someone
      tested me. Eventually it was discovered that I am a computer, but it
      turned out the other side was an Eliza program. Strangely enough, I could
      not detect that the latter fact was true.
      </sarcasm>

      Does this answer your question? Do you qualify naive or
      common-sense-deprived as computer-like? Is the human mind not
      a Turing-complete computer? Aren't humans equivalent to computers
      according to Church's Thesis? Would it be possible for a human to make it
      look like he is a computer? (say, by replying "yes" all the time)

      Regards,

      Shlomi Fish

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

      >
      > Gilad
      > --
      > Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@...>
      > http://benyossef.com
      > "Hail Eris! All Hail Discordia!"
      >
      >
      >
      > 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?"
    • Shlomi Fish
      ... OK. But a nice or very nice or not bad could go a long way. It s like giving a lecture, and nobody asks any questions. One cannot tell if they
      Message 2 of 14 , May 15, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        On Wed, 15 May 2002, Adi Stav wrote:

        > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 08:46:21AM +0300, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote:
        > > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 08:05:35AM +0300, 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
        >
        > Muli answered, but since we're deep in meta-land I thought I'd represent
        > an alternative view.
        >
        > > Let us assume that each message sent to the list, N people read. Past
        > > experience shows that a certain percent of those N people, which we
        > > shall denote by n, reply to the message. We can postulate that if a
        > > message is interesting, n will be relatively large.
        >
        > For me, this was not the case. The original message was not
        > un-interesting -- on the contrary, I found it mildly amusing (which
        > is good - it's better than most of the supposedly amusing stuff I read
        > on the internet). Other people might have a different taste. But I found
        > in the post nothing of interest to REPLY to. There was nothing for me to
        > say anything about, and if I am to judge by the reactions, neither did
        > anyone else.
        >

        OK. But a "nice" or "very nice" or "not bad" could go a long way. It's
        like giving a lecture, and nobody asks any questions. One cannot tell if
        they understand it or not.

        > Now, this is a discussion group. I don't find anything inherently wrong
        > with standalone presentations of wit, but in the end of the day something
        > had better contribute towards good old fashioned discussion threads, at
        > least on hackers-il.
        >

        I don't see it solely as a discussion group. It's also a place for
        announcements, URLs, (like you said) hacks, and whatever else is
        considered on-topic here. I believe this thread could have started a
        discussion. Obviously I don't know many languages enough to parody them
        the way I intended (pardon the pun), so people could have added more, or
        added more entries to the list.

        > Your SECOND post, on the other hand, was quite annoying, because
        > essentially it placed the blame of not finding discussion interest in
        > your post on US. You should look in yourself instead, and try to estimate
        > possible reactions.

        I did not try to put the blame on you. I was simply afraid that the
        meta-thread of all those "wanna-be hackers" people shadowed my original
        post as people were too involved in it. I was just trying to get some
        discussion (or expression of opinions) going. Sorry if you were offended
        in the process.

        > If you use the list as body of critics for your work
        > then you chose the wrong place, because you will need to be more and
        > more aggressive just to actually get this criticism, and this criticism
        > will therefore tend to be more and more artificially negative. Sounds
        > familiar?
        >

        Understood. Do you know any computer forum where I can post such jokes and
        get some reactions and commentary instead?

        Regards,

        Shlomi Fish

        >
        > 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?"
      • Gilad Ben-Yossef
        ... No. I qualify having trouble parsing communication because unawarness to implicit cues delivering social context as computer like. Sometimes what humans
        Message 3 of 14 , May 15, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          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.

          The even better news is that once you do you'll discover tha because
          you've learned in an explicit aware manner what most people absorve with
          their mother's milk you are much aware of these social cues and
          sub-contexts then most people are. This can enable you to 'read' someone
          you're communicating with and learn more then he or she wanted to reveal
          about their motives and reasons for behaviour. Sometimes you can even
          manipulate this hidden channel of communication to help you pursade
          people by 'speaking' in the right way that will work with your
          counterpart; sort of modern days 'speaking with tounges' from the bible.
          note that I am NOT talking about saying somthing else to please the
          lsitener - I am talking about saying it in a different way to please the
          listener (presentation, not content). Don't be confused.

          This is a very big aqnd interesting field that deals with the
          dissmenation of ideas, memes, thought viruses and meta viruses. If
          you're really interested, go read 'Snow Crash' and search for Neuro
          Lingual Programing (Warning: there are a lot of bullshitters in this
          field, just like anything else. Don't take anything for granted).

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

          LOL

          --
          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."
        • Arik Baratz
          Why not write a program that will write either nice , very nice , or not bad ? It will not pass the turing test, but it will give you the kind of input you
          Message 4 of 14 , May 15, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            Why not write a program that will write either 'nice', 'very nice', or 'not bad'? It will not pass the turing test, but it will give you the kind of input you are looking for. Why force our hand to supply it? I think rec.humor.funny would be a better audience to your jests.

            -- Arik

            -----Original Message-----
            From: Shlomi Fish [mailto:shlomif@...]
            Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 9:06 AM
            To: hackers-il@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: [hackers-il] Re: Cryptic Opinions [was RE: Ways to do it - Take 2]


            [snip]

            OK. But a "nice" or "very nice" or "not bad" could go a long way. It's
            like giving a lecture, and nobody asks any questions. One cannot tell if
            they understand it or not.



            ********************************************************
            This email has been scanned by Port Authority.

            ********************************************************
          • Shlomi Fish
            ... OK. ... Ack. 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
            Message 5 of 14 , 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.
              >

              OK.

              > 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.
              >

              Ack.

              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
              same.

              Regards,

              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?"
            • Arik Baratz
              Shlomi Fish wrote: [snip] ... I m afraid that your beliefs in the matter means nothing to the people you interact with, at least in the first stages where they
              Message 6 of 14 , May 15, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                Shlomi Fish wrote:

                [snip]

                > 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.
                >
                I'm afraid that your beliefs in the matter means nothing to the people
                you interact with, at least in the first stages where they don't know
                you and have to create their first impression of you.

                Although some people will appreciate your straightforward, direct and
                unambiguous communications, others (the majority of people on the
                planet, it seems) would not.

                And by *purposely* ignoring the subliminal channel of your
                communications, you not only open the door for misinterpretation, you
                perpetuate the misinterpretation. You are transmitting something on that
                channel, like it or not. By just ignoring it you may be more sincere. By
                purposefully transmitting a stream of zeroes on that channel you deliver
                a stong message of reluctance to adhere to the conventions of society,
                and that message is received VERY badly by a high precentage of the
                people around you. Subliminally, but strong enough for them not to like
                you, or have a bad impression of you.

                Maybe less so in the Technion, but the people who find themselves in the
                Technion care much less about social conventions, by definition :-)

                Gilad has stated the best solution IMHO - go learn NLP. I know it has
                changed the way I look at life. I think NLP can be classified as actual
                hacking. It's a skill for maniplating a system - for fun and/or profit.
                Much like social engineering, it deals with wetware.

                I still got a lot to learn myself, since I make a lot of mistakes daily.
                At least I know when I do.

                Take care.

                -- Arik
              • Chen Shapira
                Please, if you want to discuss Shlomi s psychology (or anyone elses), do it off the list. If you have any general principles, explain them without telling
                Message 7 of 14 , May 15, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  Please, if you want to discuss Shlomi's psychology (or anyone elses), do it
                  off the list.
                  If you have any general principles, explain them without telling other
                  people how to live their life.

                  You can alway open shrinks-il :-)

                  > -----Original Message-----
                  > From: Arik Baratz [mailto:arikb@...]
                  > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 1:48 PM
                  > To: hackers-il@yahoogroups.com
                  > Subject: Re: [hackers-il] Re: Re: Cryptic Opinions [was RE: Ways to do
                  > it - Take 2]
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Shlomi Fish wrote:
                  >
                  > [snip]
                  >
                  > > 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.
                  > >
                  > I'm afraid that your beliefs in the matter means nothing to
                  > the people
                  > you interact with, at least in the first stages where they don't know
                  > you and have to create their first impression of you.
                  >
                  > Although some people will appreciate your straightforward, direct and
                  > unambiguous communications, others (the majority of people on the
                  > planet, it seems) would not.
                  >
                  > And by *purposely* ignoring the subliminal channel of your
                  > communications, you not only open the door for misinterpretation, you
                  > perpetuate the misinterpretation. You are transmitting
                  > something on that
                  > channel, like it or not. By just ignoring it you may be more
                  > sincere. By
                  > purposefully transmitting a stream of zeroes on that channel
                  > you deliver
                  > a stong message of reluctance to adhere to the conventions of
                  > society,
                  > and that message is received VERY badly by a high precentage of the
                  > people around you. Subliminally, but strong enough for them
                  > not to like
                  > you, or have a bad impression of you.
                  >
                  > Maybe less so in the Technion, but the people who find
                  > themselves in the
                  > Technion care much less about social conventions, by definition :-)
                  >
                  > Gilad has stated the best solution IMHO - go learn NLP. I know it has
                  > changed the way I look at life. I think NLP can be classified
                  > as actual
                  > hacking. It's a skill for maniplating a system - for fun
                  > and/or profit.
                  > Much like social engineering, it deals with wetware.
                  >
                  > I still got a lot to learn myself, since I make a lot of
                  > mistakes daily.
                  > At least I know when I do.
                  >
                  > Take care.
                  >
                  > -- Arik
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                  > ---------------------~-->
                  > Tied to your PC? Cut Loose and
                  > Stay connected with Yahoo! Mobile
                  > http://us.click.yahoo.com/QBCcSD/o1CEAA/sXBHAA/saFolB/TM
                  > --------------------------------------------------------------
                  > -------~->
                  >
                  > 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/
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.