Re: FYI: AI-programmer

Discussion in 'Python' started by Chris Angelico, Feb 22, 2013.

  1. On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 9:11 PM, Gisle Vanem <> wrote:
    > Here is something interesting that you pythonistas might be
    > interested in:
    > http://www.primaryobjects.com/CMS/Article149.aspx
    >
    > """This article describes an experiment to produce an AI program, capable of
    > developing its own programs, using a genetic algorithm implementation with
    > self-modifying and self-improving code. """
    >
    > The above experimental BrainF** language was written using C#. So who will
    > be the first to make an AI-language in Python that generates it's own
    > program?


    That's not artificial intelligence, though. It's artificial program
    generation based on a known target output. The "Fitness" calculation
    is based on a specific target string. This is fine for devising a
    program that will produce the entire works of Shakespeare, since there
    is a target string for that (actually, several targets, plus you have
    to work out whether you want the works of Shakespeare or the works of
    some guy named Bacon... mmm bacon), but I suggest that a more
    sophisticated and useful goal be implemented.

    As suggested in RFC 2795 [1], the resources required to implement such
    a project would also have other uses. Like the Infinite Improbability
    Drive, this is power that we should put to a very practical use...
    such as ending world poverty, curing disease, or most importantly,
    writing a good situation comedy for television. [4]

    This program generation technique is highly superior to the technique
    of taking a number of highly paid programmers, supplying them with
    coffee and Internets, and expecting them to produce the code you want.
    Empirical evidence has shown repeatedly that highly paid programmers
    will produce bugs, and entire programming subindustries exist to
    manage these bugs; instead, use of virtualized monkeys running on
    innumerable cores of a massively parallel system (note, incidentally,
    that RFC 2795 was careful specifically to not preclude implementations
    involving subatomic monkeys or multiple universes - I'm sure
    virtualization is one of those, but I'm not sure which), with
    consequent massive increase of throughput and output.

    Please proceed with this implementation, but do keep RFC 2795 in mind.
    You want to remain interoperable, which means following the standards.

    ChrisA

    [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2795
    [4] The author of RFC 2795 was unable to find a reference in any issue
    of TV Guide published between 1956 and the date of that document.
     
    Chris Angelico, Feb 22, 2013
    #1
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Gisle Vanem

    FYI: AI-programmer

    Gisle Vanem, Feb 22, 2013, in forum: Python
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    100
    Gisle Vanem
    Feb 22, 2013
  2. Gisle Vanem

    Re: FYI: AI-programmer

    Gisle Vanem, Feb 22, 2013, in forum: Python
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    87
    Neil Cerutti
    Feb 22, 2013
  3. Ian Kelly

    Re: FYI: AI-programmer

    Ian Kelly, Feb 22, 2013, in forum: Python
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    124
    Ian Kelly
    Feb 22, 2013
  4. Andrew Robinson

    Re: FYI: AI-programmer

    Andrew Robinson, Feb 22, 2013, in forum: Python
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    69
    Andrew Robinson
    Feb 22, 2013
  5. Ian Kelly

    Re: FYI: AI-programmer

    Ian Kelly, Feb 22, 2013, in forum: Python
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    90
    Ian Kelly
    Feb 22, 2013
Loading...

Share This Page