Forum Annals: Quotes of the day - page 49
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
Things are progressing slowly, but the thought occurs to me that if the market does not care about the story, then apparently it doubly does not care about what we have predicted based on the story. In other areas I want to try, the fact that (18) comes out on the trail of any pattern and wrote such a post on the DOD forum:
There are cases when it is difficult to determine the trajectory of a target because of a complex pattern embedded in its movement algorithm. I propose a way to effectively detect this pattern for quick interception of the target. Interested people or organizations can contact me. Or advise me where to apply.
yosuf 14.01.2012 18:07
Things are progressing slowly, but the thought occurs to me that if the market does not care about the story, then apparently it doubly does not care about what we have predicted based on the story. In other areas I want to try, the fact that (18) comes out on the trail of any pattern and wrote such a post on the DOD forum:
There are cases when it is difficult to determine the trajectory of a target because of a complex pattern embedded in its movement algorithm. I propose a way to effectively detect this pattern for quick interception of the target. Interested people or organizations can contact me. Or advise me where to apply.
Did he really say that? As I predicted: forex is just the beginning for Yusuf. Soon all the processes in the universe will be able to be explained by the mighty (18).
Unlike special gifted neural geniuses, the algorithm does not know in which of the variables certain features (tails, wings, landing gear, etc.) are given and yet it only by the numerical values of these very variables given in the examples, determines their importance and precisely classifies objects.
In that case, the specific question is: how many grams of undercarriage and tail are in each fly (we determine what is what by weight, after all)? If you are comparing a fly with an aeroplane and the first thing that comes to your mind is that the fly has no landing gear, then this is clinical. Can you imagine a man analysing the world around him like that? They'd be locked up the next day. But a neural net doing the same thing is the height of skill and computer sophistication. Imagine a savage who's never seen an aeroplane. He does not know what is a landing gear, a wing, a tail, but he will always distinguish a fly from an aeroplane or even a rocket from a starship, though he has never seen neither of them (there is not a single known feature). What criteria his brain is guided by is unknown, but he is capable of classification at the highest, abstract level, unlike your neural grid-tumblr.
p.s. Your neural mesh resembles a severe form of autism. People suffering from this disease are in part like robots, they tend to have highly developed logical thinking and mathematical abilities, but nevertheless they are severely ill people in need of treatment, and unable to live without help in the real world.
In that case, the specific question is: how many grams of landing gear and tail are in each fly (we use weights to determine what is what)? If you are comparing a fly with an aeroplane, and the first thing that comes to your mind is that the fly has no landing gear, then it is clinical. Can you imagine a man analysing the world around him like that? They'd be locked up the next day. But a neural net doing the same thing is the height of skill and computer sophistication. Imagine a savage who's never seen an aeroplane. He does not know what is a landing gear, a wing, a tail, but he will always distinguish a fly from an aeroplane or even a rocket from a starship, though he has never seen neither of them (there is not a single known feature). What criteria his brain uses is unknown, but he is capable of classification at the highest, abstract level, unlike your neural grid-balance.
Read. http://books4study.info/text-book4100.html
Read. http://books4study.info/text-book4100.html
I am not denying neural networks. It is a subtle and effective mechanism, with its own field of application, but no more than that. Artificial Intelligence does not and will not exist in the foreseeable future. The methods embedded in neural networks cannot be considered part of thinking, so there is absolutely nothing to be proud of.
Is that the question? Whoever wants it, looks for an opportunity, whoever doesn't want it, looks for a reason.
If you want to understand how expert systems work and the current place of neural networks in AI, you can start with Naylor. Although the book is old, it is up to date. The examples, by the way, are taken from there ;).
If you want to think that AI is difficult and impossible - read fiction for humanities and it will be enough. From the book review:
If you want to think AI is complicated and impossible - read fiction for humanitarians and that will suffice. From the book review:
Colleagues, you are discussing a very interesting topic.
Move your posts to the AI thread in the same order - your reasoning may be useful to many.
However, it all looks out of place in this thread.
Nothing personal.
By the way, leave it to Reshetov to continue writing here . Every statement he makes is a quote of the day )))
Colleagues, you are discussing a very interesting topic.
Move your posts to the AI thread in the same order - your reasoning may be useful to many.
However, it all looks out of place in this thread.
Nothing personal.
By the way, leave it to Reshetov to continue writing here . Every statement he makes is a quote of the day )))
He's allowed a lot as it is.