Artificial Intelligence 2020 - is there progress? - page 7
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
How will one programme cause a difference in action? What is required is to obtain a constant variety in the choices available.
Well, I'm not a digital adept. But probably an algorithm based on two elementary tasks is not as complicated as Google's script, for example. You can probably go a variety of ways. But the most elementary one is to set the ratio of negative impulses to positive ones. The algorithm will act on the basis of this ratio.
In the case of an amoeba, there are variations in the sense that there is a difference in how much it wants to eat at a given moment and how much light irritates it.
Honestly, Alexei, there are colossally more complicated tasks in this field. It's embarrassing to even write here. :)
Looking at nature, we copied the neuron and the genetic algorithm. Those are the things that give us conscious diversity. But here's an amoeba showing that you can do it without a neuron. Could this be the third option? Let us, Vitaly, come up with a software analogue.
What's there to object to? Ask what finger Zeland got that out of. If his finger...
When you walk the path of a trader, you are constantly discovering yourself. In the search for answers to questions, you may encounter such near-sectarian things. It takes a decent amount of distance to realize that there's a lot of working stuff out there) You'll come to the point where you sit in a lotus and meditate and don't need anything else (exaggerating, but not by much). As long as you're in the system, you'll have energy from the Pendulum and a pallor in your eyes. There will be your limit one day too, you'll take a step away from the market, then another. But it will not let you go so easily, your energy is there and will remain forever.
Even got curious, who was it that copied the neuron?
Rosenblatt or whoever, Pitts
Looking at nature, we copied the neuron and the genetic algorithm. Those are the things that produce conscious diversity. But here's an amoeba showing that you can do it without a neuron. Could this be the third option? Let's come up with a software analogue, Vitaly.
Unfortunately, and developers have understood that it is easier to use nature than to create an analogue. Though, the example with amoeba is, on the background of everything else, quite realizable and solely by means of programs.
Whether neurons are there or not... in the context of this problem is not important. The main thing is to understand the principles.
When you follow the path of a trader, you are constantly discovering yourself. When searching for answers to questions, you may come across this kind of near-sectarian stuff. It takes a decent amount of distance to realise that there's a lot of working stuff out there) You'll come to the point where you sit in a lotus and meditate and don't need anything else (exaggerating, but not by much). As long as you're in the system, you'll have energy from the Pendulum and a pallor in your eyes. There will be your limit one day too, you'll take a step away from the market, then another. But it will not let you go so easily, your energy is there and will stay forever.
I will not go into a response sermon. The question was asked quite clearly and concretely: where did Zeland get it from?
Judging from the respondent's reaction, the probability of driving an autopilot is 90%. So much for Zeland. It is worthwhile not only to read Zeland, but to process what you read (if you have any). Then you can draw some real conclusions.
In the case of an amoeba, there are variations in the sense that there is a difference in how much it wants to eat at a given moment, and how much light irritates it in the process.
Well, how do you say it right? The world is spreading around us in all directions. We can't go everywhere. And we are forced to choose a direction. If we do it accidentally, we do not benefit. That is, we go according to our experience, but somewhere we encounter difficulties and deviate. And at the beginning of the path we cannot predict the whole route. In order to write a program that doesn't know in advance the endpoint and the route itself, we have to put in the intelligence that we ourselves use. Because all the possible choices will take a kilomegatrillion combinations
I'm not going to go into a sermon in response. The question was asked quite clearly and specifically: where did Zeland get it from?
Judging from the respondent's reaction, the probability that the driver is autopilot is 90%. So much for Zeland. It is worthwhile not only to read Zeland, but to process what you read (if you have any). Then you can draw some real conclusions.
Ask him). When the fervor wears off, read it again, maybe something will come back to you.)
I'm going to sit in a lotus and then go to sleep.
Well, how do you say it right? The world is spreading around us in all directions. We can't go everywhere. And we are forced to choose a direction. If we do it accidentally, we do not benefit. That is, we go according to our experience, but somewhere we encounter difficulties and deviate. And at the beginning of the path we cannot predict the whole route. In order to write a program that doesn't know in advance the endpoint and the route itself, we have to put in the intelligence that we ourselves use. Because all the possible choices will take kilomegatrillions of combinations
These are fallacies of linear logic. I have described the essence of the problem to you clearly. If the question is about finding optimal paths by the principle of that example with an amoeba, you won't need more as code than in the example itself.
As for more global tasks, Alexey... We live in absolute energy coverage due to satellites, G.S.M. etc. If you add dimensionless servers and databases to it, the world you're talking about (if we're talking about our planet), there's not a single place on it that hasn't been digitized in all sorts of formats. Come back to the 21st century, my friend. :)