Genady

"Which is more rational to believe without evidence: Something that makes you happy or something that makes you laugh?" -- Equal. "Dawkins can't prove that God doesn't exist, yet he's happy to point the finger and claim, they're delusional." -- He doesn't need to. See above. Also, see your own B. Russell's quote: "...as though it were the business of sceptics to disprove received dogmas rather than of dogmatists to prove them. This is, of course, a mistake." "karma for instance is practically Newtonian" -- I disagree.

You're right. And this is a limitation. I think that one big difference is this: in a game there exists a prescription for how to generate all possible moves; there is no such a prescription in real world.

I agree. The subtlety is, that we can make it to do just that, what ever that is, e.g. your scenario above. And it will be doing just that forever. The just that includes a possibility to modify that in some ways. Then, it will be modifying that in these same ways forever...

Thank you. Got it. No problem.

What technique do they use to do it?

"To brainwash a massive amount of people" - like the Russian government does? Thanks.

To train the DDN they "use[d] the RL policy network to play more than 30 million games." How many games a human master plays or studies in their training?

Conspiracy? Where is it from?

I don't assume that you intentionally lie. No, it never happened to me. Even when some contents change, like song lyrics, there are always previous versions around.

I don't believe it.

Of course they know Russian - Russian was the main language in all USSR, for 70+ years. I know Russian, too, it is my first language, although I'm not Russian and was not born in Russia. Not a Slav either.

Yes, a probabilistic classification function of DNN is reminiscent of strategic principles. Here is another impressive application, not a game based: "a new AI system that can create realistic images and art from a description in natural language."

I'm not sure deep neural networks work by pure combinatorics, if-then sequences. I'd rather compare them to developing, during learning stage, and then applying strategic principles. Not "conceptual", this means something different to me, but strategic.

And what is the difference between quantum mechanics and relativity?

Sorry, can't say anything about Taoism, don't know. But I know a lot about Marxism. Is it a religion?

It is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for a thing to be a religion. Another necessary condition is, belief in supernatural. Atheism doesn't have that.

In what way are viruses helpful to us?

Religion is not just any belief. It has to include a belief in a supernatural to be a religion. That's why atheism is not a religion.

Yes, certainly not the whole story.

Perhaps I need to clarify that I don't mean that every task in a real life setting is a different kind of task to playing games. I rather think that there is always a task in real life setting which is different. Then we'll make a computer to cover that kind. And then there will be another, and so on.

I rather think that a task in a real life setting is a different kind of task to playing games.

For communication. We are irrational inside our heads, but to communicate successfully we need a rational representation of our thoughts. E.g. you've asked the question and I'm trying my best to give a rational answer. If communication is not rational, it is broken. (There are examples of such in some recent threads...)

In the very recent textbook from the University of Pennsylvania, Physical Models of Living Systems: Probability, Simulation, Dynamics by Philip Nelson, November 2021, there is a little section in the introduction for students, which I have attached below. My questions for the discussions are: Do you agree with these limitations of computers? Are they temporary or fundamental?

To me, the most interesting part of the article was not about the new viruses - they looked in a new environment, they found a new stuff, not very surprising - but rather about the RdRp gene: "They examined genetic sequences extracted from small aquatic organisms known as plankton, which are common hosts for RNA viruses, the researchers said. They homed in on sequences belonging to RNA viruses by looking for an ancient gene called RdRp, which is found in all RNA viruses but is absent from other viruses and cells." "RdRp gene is billions of years old" "Understanding how the RdRp gene diverged over time could lead to a better understanding of how early life evolved on Earth, the authors said." "RdRp is supposed to be one of the most ancient genes — it existed before there was a need for DNA" "So we’re not just tracing the origins of viruses, but also tracing the origins of life."

I see now. Thank you, I've misinterpreted. BTW, I think that only very few particular behaviors can be traced to a molecular basis. Esp. if they are not disorders.