Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Seraphi

  1. So, the way I see it. Icu - Colony - Human resources and diplomatic affairs Nero - Ship 1 - Military affairs Retech - Ship 2 - Research and Development This seems to be a pretty good system if you ask me. Each person gets the role which most suits them and they will be most adept at. If we all work together, we have all the bases covered and it should be a smooth process. Assuming we don't all start keeping stupid secrets from each other. This system does not give any one division total control. If R&D goes rogue, they don't have the manpower to stop the military. If military goes rogue, they do not have the hardware to function. If colony goes rogue, they have no defense.
  2. I dunno. Nero makes a pretty good captain, since he actually understands what that position entails. It does not entail making all of the crew happy, all of the time, as a rule. It entails making the decisions which have the highest chance to benefit the ship as an entity and the federation above it REGARDLESS of whether some crewmembers disagree with it. Point is, being able to make people see your side of the story.
  3. Are you talking about workshops, then? Because that is a submenu of the menu.
  4. Unless I am very much mistaken, it is , followed by selecting an appropriate space for the building in question, and then selecting the materials to use in the building, if any are available. http://df.magmawiki.com/index.php/Buildings
  5. It's funny because the second I am taken out of the equation everyone is clueless as to who should be captain. I can't really be captain because I am a psion, and psions are viewed as untrustworthy and evil.
  6. I always use the recycle bin just in case. Not to mention I have a 1TB hard disk so running out of space is highly unlikely.
  7. It will be a vote. I will not be running for captain. I am also playing a heavily psionic individual. Registered and sanctioned, of course.
  8. [hide][/hide] The appeal of Dwarf Fortress lies not in it's graphics or it's interface (Which I agree is going to need work, but the Developer (One guy) has already stated that the interface will be upgraded in due time.) but in it's depth. Do you know another game which simulates the exact amount of blood is in a fieldmouse? Know another game which simulates muscle and nerve damage for every single part of the body? Dwarf Fortress isn't for everyone, I'll be the first to say it. To some, it is a horribly boring cluster[bleep] of symbols and letter which is completely unintelligible. All I ask is that you give it a try and find out for yourself. And yes, it is the hardest game to get into ever made. Yes, you will ragequit as the dwarves in your first dozen forts slowly starve to death while punching each other so hard that the skull is broken and severe spine damage is attained, but that's part of the appeal as well. Remember: Losing is fun. Losing SPECTACULARLY is amazing. Also, a must read if you intend to play it. Boatmurdered is what coaxed me into turning it back on after ragequitting for the tenth time in a single day. http://lparchive.org/Dwarf-Fortress-Boatmurdered/ (I sound just like a spokesperson)
  9. Their main purpose in this game is to be the target of large amounts of fantastic racism. It's funny, because I don't think they know that AIs in this iteration are basically confined to a large blue box. And are hated by basically every human.
  10. I am glad that you are taking a more structured approach, since while the freeform element was fun, it did lead to a lot of problems. As a question of balance, are you trying to make research less essential to the process this time? In the previous game, you basically could not do anything without research, and those of us who were terrible at puzzles ended up having to completely rely on the ones who were good at them, which didn't always work out. A method to obtain research points at a slower rate without doing puzzles, for example, or more tech being available to purchase/salvage/"liberate"? Aside from that minor gripe, it should be just as fun as last time, and I will have my character to you by sometime tommorow.
  11. Errr... That description fits Cleverbot pretty well. Autonomous entity which observes (Reads what you type) and acts (Gives a response) upon an environment (The chat window) and directs it's activity into achieving goals (Giving the illusion of intelligence. Honestly, from what I have seen thus far, I'm fairly certain that were I to judge a turing contest with cleverbot, it would have a 0% success rate. You see it as intelligent because you wish it were intelligent. It is simply giving you an impression of intelligence which you have bought rather deeply into.
  12. This always happens. People argue against you and then you resort to pedantism.
  13. Indeed. In truth, I imagine the programming is even more simple than I thought before. Because the conversations seem to driven by randomness a good 80% of the time. It almost seems like the bot is schizophrenic. I assume it looks for key words in phrases and then compares it to words in what the user has just said... And if none are found, it responds with a random sentence from a previous conversation. It seems really simple to me. Not sure why you don't understand the idea behind a basic input/output system. It doesn't know what any of this stuff is, it doesn't have an opinion on what any of this stuff is, and it is not doing anything on purpose. It is doing it because it is programmed to look for X in a sentence, search it's data stores, and then return Y if it is found, Z if not found. It is NOTHING more than this.
  14. Out of these, Cleverbot has proven itself capable of communication, reasoning, learning, EI and problem solving, it implies (but cannot fully prove) understanding and planning, abstract though I am more unsure of, as that can neither be proved or disproved without somehow finding out if it has ever created a sentence on its own that was neither programmed or learned. How many times do I have to repeat this. It does not learn, it simply records. It does not think, it only calculates. It does not understand, it merely knows. It does not have abstract thought because it doesn't think. It does not understand, it only knows. It *does* communicate, but only because it is programmed to. It does reason, because logical reasoning is the basis of computing. It does not learn, it only records. It does not plan, because it does not learn or understand. It has no emotional intelligence because that would imply a combination of the previous factors. It *May* solve problems, but that's only because it is one of the fundamental points of computing. A blind person can still imagine a red ball. They may not imagine it correctly, but they CAN imagine it. Cleverbot cannot imagine it, either correctly or incorrectly. It is simply not capable of imagining a red ball in any way, shape or form. From this, I take away the fact that Cleverbot, is, in fact, a program on a computer which is neither intelligent nor sentient. Instead, it gives the illusion of intelliigence and sentience, but it will never be anything more than an illusion without massive redesigns (IE, throw everything we have right now away and start over. This time, be sure to hire the worlds top programmers.)
  15. Unless, of course, the program has got those defenitions preinterpreted for it, by another user or other source. I think this seems to be the more likely choice between these two scenarios.
  16. So we have successfully proven that it is linked to a database of word definitions? Mather, this argument is going around in a circle. It can "Learn" songs because it recognises patterns and has been subjected to them before. it saves this data on a log file, which is then recalled by stimulus from another user. It's relatively simple, if rather longwinded programming. Remember my 7 word phrase. It does not think. It only calculates. Therefore, it does not understand, it only knows. By this I mean that it does not understand that those are songs, it only knows that those are words and that it should do X when criteria Y is fulfilled. This is basically the exact definition of a computer program.
  17. See, 90% of that just looks like random responses to me. Mather, then it may be due to logs of previous statements or an IP address, or any number of reasons. And you don't need to have pre written sentences when you design a script which writes the sentences for you based on things the program identifies. The criteria for these identifications are likely extremely rudimentary, using basic word substitution in text strings. Something even a monkey could code. You are ignoring my main point though. Cleverbot cannot learn. It doesn't think. What does it do? It calculates. ones and zeroes and ones, that line up so that text pops out of the program and gives the illusion of intelligence. An illusion which, it appears, you have bought into. In reality, it cannot understand, it can only know.
  18. Resistance, repeating yourself rarely helps you find an answer here. If nobody responded the first two times, it is unlikly they will after a third, and it can be portrayed as rude to repeat yourself.
  19. Because it will never understand what any of the things you tell it mean. It does not have a personality, it is not sentient, it is merely a program which matches prewritten responses to local stimuli. I personally would not define it as sentient because without outside intervention, it cannot pass a boundry threshhold of intelligence. It CANNOT understand what a red ball is. It knows the word red ball, but it will never imagine a red ball. You can define it as much as you want, but that still does not mean that it knows what a red ball is. Just because it can define the term "Self" doesn't mean it is sentient, because it is simply a prewritten response. It didn't come to it's own understanding of self, it is not aware that it exists, it does not think. It simply calculates. I'm going to place emphasis on those last 7 words: It does not think. It simply calculates. It is very easy to create multiple instances of the same program and have them all save data to a single storage point. A two dimensional array would probably work fine, and 1GB worth of storage could hold a 2D array of unimaginable size. I remain unimpressed by the programming behind it. EDIT: If Name = "Mathias" Then Saveline.text = "[English answer here]" Outputtextline.Text = "" Outputtextline.Text = "[Translated Saveline.text]" There could be a database of norwegian names which it recognises.
  20. You realise that a string data type requires an absurdly small amount of storage space? It learns from them by use of self continuing code. It looks for certain sentance patterns, looks for words within those patterns, and then saves those words for later use. Dim Nameline As String If Textline.Text = "Hello, my name is $Name$" Then Nameline = "$Name$" End If If Textline.Text = "What is my name?" Then Outputtextline.Text = "$Name$" End If The dollar signs are only there because I have forgotten the actual method to use that. It can be done though. No guarentees that this code will actually work if placed into a VB program, but you can understand the basic idea behind it. This demonstrates a program fragment that can, for all intents and purposes, learn your name. Does it know what a name is? Does it know that a name is a personal identifier? No, it knows that a name is a string data type which should be returned when Textline.text = "What is my name?" or any variation thereof.
  21. That seems like pretty simple programming if you ask me. All cleverbot does is prove that it is possible to create a program which writes itself. Yes, it is a rudimentary AI, no, it is not, or cannot, ever be more than that: Rudimentary. Hell, I could probably write a program which writes itself in the same way, and I'm only a beginner at programming. The limitation with the system which it uses is that (I assume) it is using basic word substitution and recognition to create new parts of the program, so it will never learn what any of these things mean or what they are or do, just what to say in response to what you give it.
  22. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.
  23. Honestly, I try not to be judgemental. It's just that I have seen that type of character before and it has been a trainwreck more often than not. Don't get me wrong, I hope you play it well, but I tend to cringe whenever I see certain words in character descriptions now.
  24. Aetas Zephyr (Hurrah generic latin/greek words) Slot 1: Time Slot 2: Air (Does this work? I figured since I can't really make a sword out of time for slot 5 I could use this instead. Plus, slot 2 is redundant with an element which cannot be used to hit people with anyway) Slot 3: Warp Slot 4: Offensive Slot 5: Gunsword. Think a revolver with an oversized bayonette, basically. Will probably make a backstory later.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.