Are they alive?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

Here's something Steve Grand wrote way back in 1997
(http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.games.creatures/browse_frm/thread/fa64f71ac3135322/6c80cec0c5d7dfe5?q=&_done=%2Fgroups%3Fenc_author%3DNEh2bRgAAABpnzTRIR4pTfVqJv-9flJkWKLNRqB-u4_S4z0CNL-NQg%26&_doneTitle=Back+to+Search&&d#6c80cec0c5d7dfe5)


Firstly, I'd like to say that I'm extremely touched and delighted by the
quality and quantity of stuff you people are doing on this newsgroup and at
home. My norns are clearly in safe hands (even if some of you do have a
penchant for barely ethical recombinant DNA research on the poor things!).

The reason I'm posting here is that I'm speaking at a conference in about
two weeks on the subject of "when/if software can ever be described as
truly alive". There don't seem to have been many debates about whether
norns are "just simulations" or whether in some sense that can be described
as real living things. I think it's a valid question to ask, and you all
know that I went to fairly extreme lengths to model biological systems
inside the norns, so that their behaviour would be emergent, rather than
merely programmed in. I certainly intended to make norns real living
things, or as near to it as I could get. However, my own views on the
subject are rather complex and difficult to describe. What I was wondering
was: what do you lot think?

I'd be interested to hear anyone's views on whether norns are alive,
whether any kind of software (if for now you assume that we are not
software too, which is another story) can be alive, and what "alive" means
anyway. At the very least I'd appreciate a straw poll to see how many of
you would vote one way or the other. This would be very helpful for me as I
try and get my head around the topic for my conference talk. Please reply
on this thread. If it gets into a debate and I don't respond much, I
apologise - I'm a bit busy right now. Thanks for any contribution you care
to make.

Steve.

Stephen Grand
Director of Technology
Cyberlife Technology Ltd.
Steph...@cyberlife.co.uk
www.cyberlife.co.uk

I thought I'd revive the question. What do we all think?

--
- nornagon
http://www.nornrock.com
mailto: nornagon@gmail.com
DS Species range: 10001-10100

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2005-02-26, nornagon <nornagon@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here's something Steve Grand wrote way back in 1997
> (http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.games.creatures/browse_frm/thread/fa64f71ac3135322/6c80cec0c5d7dfe5?q=&_done=%2Fgroups%3Fenc_author%3DNEh2bRgAAABpnzTRIR4pTfVqJv-9flJkWKLNRqB-u4_S4z0CNL-NQg%26&_doneTitle=Back+to+Search&&d#6c80cec0c5d7dfe5)
>
>
> Firstly, I'd like to say that I'm extremely touched and delighted by the
> quality and quantity of stuff you people are doing on this newsgroup and at
> home. My norns are clearly in safe hands (even if some of you do have a
> penchant for barely ethical recombinant DNA research on the poor things!).
>
> The reason I'm posting here is that I'm speaking at a conference in about
> two weeks on the subject of "when/if software can ever be described as
> truly alive". There don't seem to have been many debates about whether
> norns are "just simulations" or whether in some sense that can be described
> as real living things. I think it's a valid question to ask, and you all
> know that I went to fairly extreme lengths to model biological systems
> inside the norns, so that their behaviour would be emergent, rather than
> merely programmed in. I certainly intended to make norns real living
> things, or as near to it as I could get. However, my own views on the
> subject are rather complex and difficult to describe. What I was wondering
> was: what do you lot think?
>
> I'd be interested to hear anyone's views on whether norns are alive,
> whether any kind of software (if for now you assume that we are not
> software too, which is another story) can be alive, and what "alive" means
> anyway. At the very least I'd appreciate a straw poll to see how many of
> you would vote one way or the other. This would be very helpful for me as I
> try and get my head around the topic for my conference talk. Please reply
> on this thread. If it gets into a debate and I don't respond much, I
> apologise - I'm a bit busy right now. Thanks for any contribution you care
> to make.
>
> Steve.
>
> Stephen Grand
> Director of Technology
> Cyberlife Technology Ltd.
> Steph...@cyberlife.co.uk
> www.cyberlife.co.uk
>
> I thought I'd revive the question. What do we all think?

0.5 for alive
0.5 for not alive
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better...
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

nornagon wrote:
> Here's something Steve Grand wrote way back in 1997
> (http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.games.creatures/browse_frm/thread/fa64f71ac3135322/6c80cec0c5d7dfe5?q=&_done=%2Fgroups%3Fenc_author%3DNEh2bRgAAABpnzTRIR4pTfVqJv-9flJkWKLNRqB-u4_S4z0CNL-NQg%26&_doneTitle=Back+to+Search&&d#6c80cec0c5d7dfe5)

<snipped long, but very interesting question>

> I thought I'd revive the question. What do we all think?

You would need to device some kind of Turing Test where people are
pretending to be Norns and other Norns are executed by a computer. If an
observer can't tell the real Norns from the human operated Norns, the
Norns should be considered alive.

To put it another way: If a human can fool an observer into thinking
that he or she is a Norn then the assumption that a Norn is not alive
will result in the conclusion that the Human is also not alive. This is
clearly false (but how do you proof Humans themselves are alive?), thus
the opposite must be true and the Norns would be alive!

Of course, the humans would have the same input neurons the Norns would
have, otherwise the humans would have an unfair advantage over the
Norns. Their actions would also be limited to the things a Norn can do.
AFAIK language is hardcoded in the Norns and not part of the
neurological brain.

Other things to consider are if the input and output possibilities of a
Norn brain are complex enough to even be considered to be alive. And
what if you severely cripple an insect so it wouldn't have more inputs
(e.g. eyes) than a Norn? Would you still call it alive? And if so, is it
justified to feel bad for the crippled insect in the way that some
people felt bad and emotional about tortured Norns?

Thomas
- --
"All my life, I've always wondered, What it would be like to fire a
ballistic missile" - Wonderfully colored plastic war toys, The Dead
Milkmen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQB5AwUBQiCCFgEP2l8iXKAJAQGiKQMfWFrNhQoKAzI3XM+HdbIswL4P5MNO1etd
QerilAzdRYmNKi+yYWBx23n8O5HncQfxzHDfwfFcP4avMpTtom5YDXkvI3pk+rU0
c3DyhXjYM+Q+CvEW6Mcl2bPhV7mweWPyJ0r9DQ==
=WQhS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Vadim wrote:
> Thomas J. Boschloo wrote:
>
>
>>>But you could wire up your brain to a cats body like you could
>>>wire it up to a Norn with your program. It would get some
>>>getting used to, but you could perhaps even proof that your Cat
>>>is more alive than you are yourself since you do so poorly
>>>imitate it! A real cat would know the difference, just like a
>>>real Norn would ;-D
>
>
> But that again makes little sense. The brain isn't like a mech
> pilot, which just happens to be "driving" a more or less complex
> body. They both evolved together.

I must have been playing too much Messiah ;-0

> Cat brains are optimal for cats, human ones for humans. How would
> you wiggle your tail if your brain got connected to a cat? The
> vision would probably be bizarre to you, and the hearing and
> smell senses strange as well. You'd need to learn to walk again,
> etc.

Still, it would be great to be e.g. a seagull for a while. Wouldn't it?
I believe the "Native American's" had a stronger connection with their
surroundings then we have now. Maybe at a spiritual level we could
control a cat. Nah, I have just been watching too many movies. Seen
"Being John Malkovich"? Not brilliant, but fun to watch. Though it has a
pretty sad ending for the main character (but I don't want to spoil the
story). <http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120601/>

> The other way, I doubt a cat brain would be any good when
> connected to a human body. I'd hope we'd get Nuku-Nuku out of
> it, but it sounds very improbable ;-)

That's because it isn't really alive. <ducks below the table>

<snip>

> And then a friend would tell the proud owner "That is
> unbelievable - you must be very proud and happy to still own the
> original item after so many generations in your family"
>
> And the proud owner would say "Yes, and you know what? Through
> the years the handle has been replaced 6 times and the
> axe(-head) 4 times"

So you feel bad for an object that doesn't even exist in the current
universe. That actually makes sense! I value freedom of speech e.g.

hi!
Thomas
- --
"All my life, I've always wondered, What it would be like to fire a
ballistic missile" - Wonderfully colored plastic war toys, The Dead
Milkmen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQB5AwUBQiC2LAEP2l8iXKAJAQEe3AMgrHbY0RQPhvqOKbr4edxRchq1u7yl13Z/
UjL1GabbUGDdYIgHmy1Uxt5jBqVst114XerWOvsjzDugp5wMDhyeUSuNMA0F3Le4
OR7Y22xCS423jTqGMtNr0qffiNYWR+U7C3q+LQ==
=5IWV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2005-02-26, Thomas J. Boschloo <nospam@hccnet.nl.invalid> wrote:
>
> Vadim wrote:
>> Thomas J. Boschloo wrote:
>>
>>
> I have this thing with spiders, especially jumping spiders. I think they
> are cute and I just can't get myself to kill one. Note that it is pretty

I can't have them near me. 30 centimetres is fine, everything below...

> hard to catch a jumping spider because, well, they jump off your hand
> for instance! Spiders are very much alive to me and I feel kind of
> troubled when I step on an ant. I also bring those outside (and drop
> them from the third floor outside my apartment without remorse)..

Bringing the ant out is probably more of a problem than dropping it. The
ant can survive the drop without any serious wounds, but it dies of
loosing contact (or not knowing the way back for that matter) to the
hive.
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better...
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

Thomas J. Boschloo wrote:
| nornagon wrote:
|
|>>Here's something Steve Grand wrote way back in 1997
|>>(http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.games.creatures/browse_frm/thread/fa64f71ac3135322/6c80cec0c5d7dfe5?q=&_done=%2Fgroups%3Fenc_author%3DNEh2bRgAAABpnzTRIR4pTfVqJv-9flJkWKLNRqB-u4_S4z0CNL-NQg%26&_doneTitle=Back+to+Search&&d#6c80cec0c5d7dfe5)
|
|
| <snipped long, but very interesting question>
|
|>>I thought I'd revive the question. What do we all think?
|
|
| You would need to device some kind of Turing Test where people are
| pretending to be Norns and other Norns are executed by a computer. If an
| observer can't tell the real Norns from the human operated Norns, the
| Norns should be considered alive.
|
| To put it another way: If a human can fool an observer into thinking
| that he or she is a Norn then the assumption that a Norn is not alive
| will result in the conclusion that the Human is also not alive. This is
| clearly false (but how do you proof Humans themselves are alive?), thus
| the opposite must be true and the Norns would be alive!

Unfortunately, this doesn't quite work. To take it to an extreme:
Put a rock and a human ar computer consoles. Tell the human to pretend
to be a rock at a console. Since a person on the other end can't tell
the difference, by your logic, the rock must be alive.

Intelligent life can reduce the extent of its capabilities it shows.
Because of this, your test fails.

Moreover, if someone made a non-alive sentient thing of some sort (AI
program maybe?), would that not change the conclusion of the test if it
was connected instead of the human? Even though it may be acting
identically to the human?

| Of course, the humans would have the same input neurons the Norns would
| have, otherwise the humans would have an unfair advantage over the
| Norns. Their actions would also be limited to the things a Norn can do.
| AFAIK language is hardcoded in the Norns and not part of the
| neurological brain.

I can also argue the human will always fail at this - we just can't
emulate another being at the speed needed, and could not interface with
the console fast enough.

| Other things to consider are if the input and output possibilities of a
| Norn brain are complex enough to even be considered to be alive. And
| what if you severely cripple an insect so it wouldn't have more inputs
| (e.g. eyes) than a Norn? Would you still call it alive? And if so, is it
| justified to feel bad for the crippled insect in the way that some
| people felt bad and emotional about tortured Norns?

What about bacteria? I think the brain is totally orthagonal to this
discussion.

FWIW, I feel the norns aren't alive, simply because the environment
doesn't have the right level of complexity. Too much is hardcoded, and
too much is allowed to run free. Life must collect energy from its
environment and process it. Yet, a norn can gain a mutation (highlander
norns, anyone?) and run free of its environment. The environment also
prevents a complete evolution into a different kind of organism.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQiDgbvzMPsvJqdmPAQOImAf/ddN//E/coa9Mhokt6Sq2zoLdC6LJhSN8
d2KFpw5Rb6NgWcuVRsqr7EU/X9AoV14VZvpAA9zq1Q1vAHFgvx0Ahew6XqkXGm6i
sh1Wh6qu3G9y6QuKFV0wZm8g9BWQ3xa9iWD6gJH7Gdovgr+8ds2MS9CobfGIqWQp
QMyN8a5RiH0X7BSztn8oqYM1NQPnCE9sBDWvPn0LA2UTtZEUS6AP6OVZ2WlNd6Qc
gzdE1/IXKVIx4KdQdgn6oK4AG4+5NRP1rYiP8Ag3egmrpnmsLjAUrXGVX25ngfRm
Z59rcS7SjIUzlearMO59uiuhOqL8Iev9DMuBeJm6RQPpeK+wOrlo+A==
=QypP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

Vadim wrote:
| bd wrote:
|
|>>FWIW, I feel the norns aren't alive, simply because the
|>>environment doesn't have the right level of complexity. Too
|>>much is hardcoded, and too much is allowed to run free. Life
|>>must collect energy from its environment and process it. Yet, a
|>>norn can gain a mutation (highlander norns, anyone?) and run
|>>free of its environment. The environment also prevents a
|>>complete evolution into a different kind of organism.
|
|
| Well, that's a certainly interesting point.
|
| What do you think about the interesting stuff that happens in
| Conway's Game of Life? Is it alive?
|

No more so than my CPU. Evolution doesn't happen in conway's life. Just
execution.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQiEXHPzMPsvJqdmPAQNYpQgAqXAQku6tyFy6QIIglPER8NrQ4VYTbZqq
GH5lqqIizJMphIMsLtvFf5U9gar0/X5ABBBDfWObC5/TDez+hccpe8L0kvi6pEmF
Uv8U1myg7x6B4pU+1sYRoF8QUcml8act5/uALudktNCZO9wYtk4FHA6gk14wAYlE
OlCi3t2GWGx8tKWFMxgsWeyQt9ozyoaVnkN0BuRSc32I9jZVy8zRGrgIFm5kT6sF
UGDrAei8KPvEBuaz485vu6OkjzqmN9gPBTqZR43WHevct2Um4sLo+Fmx9Zc4yPAz
puO5KlVm7f40QB3pQ9y9l9lYHqdQtXBoOZSx7ZuwRpDNCMifl2EbwQ==
=3Zh2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

<snip>
> I thought I'd revive the question. What do we all think?

Our first reaction (Markus's, amusingly enough) was that it depends on the
brain--however, plants are 'alive', and then have no brain nor intelligence,
yet are alive.

In a phrase, then: Darwinian evolution. In practice, this probably
necessitates the potential to evolve beyond certain boundaries which may or
may not be in place in reference to Norns and the others.

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2005-02-26, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
><snip>
>> I thought I'd revive the question. What do we all think?
>
> Our first reaction (Markus's, amusingly enough) was that it depends on the
> brain--however, plants are 'alive', and then have no brain nor intelligence,
> yet are alive.

They have an neural network and *do* react to external input.
Intelligence is a matter of definition, of course.

> In a phrase, then: Darwinian evolution. In practice, this probably
> necessitates the potential to evolve beyond certain boundaries which may or
> may not be in place in reference to Norns and the others.

May or may not? What do *you* believe?
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better...
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2005-02-26, Vadim <me@vadim.ws> wrote:
>
> Evolution doesn't really care about how a problem is solved as
> long as it's solved in some satisfactory way, and if it turns
> out that having an emotional attachment to an axe makes survival
> more likely, then that behavior is going to be passed on,
> regardless of how irrational it is.

In fact it doesn't matter if it is making survival /more/ likely. It's
sufficient to make it not (much?) *less* likely.
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better...
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

nornagon InSaNiTised:

<snip>

>
> I thought I'd revive the question. What do we all think?
>

I think that life, as we think of it, is defined by consciousness and an ability
to learn and develop in unexpected ways. For example, we can learn to ride a
bicycle. We can learn to cook a pizza. However, you won't find norns harvesting
grain or planting seeds, will you?

In my view, Albia is not complete enough to support true life. The norns' world
is too limited for them to be considered truly 'alive'.

--
- nornagon
http://www.nornrock.com
mailto: nornagon@gmail.com
DS Species range: 10001-10100

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2005-02-26, nornagon <nornagon@gmail.com> wrote:
> nornagon InSaNiTised:
>
><snip>
>
>>
>> I thought I'd revive the question. What do we all think?
>>
>
> I think that life, as we think of it, is defined by consciousness and an ability
> to learn and develop in unexpected ways. For example, we can learn to ride a
> bicycle. We can learn to cook a pizza. However, you won't find norns harvesting
> grain or planting seeds, will you?
>
> In my view, Albia is not complete enough to support true life. The norns' world
> is too limited for them to be considered truly 'alive'.

Hm... what would happen if you put humans in a really restricted
environment :-?
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better...
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

Vadim InSaNiTised:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: RIPEMD160
>
> bd wrote:
>>
>> FWIW, I feel the norns aren't alive, simply because the
>> environment doesn't have the right level of complexity. Too
>> much is hardcoded, and too much is allowed to run free. Life
>> must collect energy from its environment and process it. Yet, a
>> norn can gain a mutation (highlander norns, anyone?) and run
>> free of its environment. The environment also prevents a
>> complete evolution into a different kind of organism.
>
> Well, that's a certainly interesting point.
>
> What do you think about the interesting stuff that happens in
> Conway's Game of Life? Is it alive?
>

Conway's Game of Life is Turing complete. That means you can model a neural net
in it. With enough processing power, you could model a universe.

This is why I believe everything is a figment of my imagination, and I am simply
a huge neural net built in Life.

--
- nornagon
http://www.nornrock.com
mailto: nornagon@gmail.com
DS Species range: 10001-10100

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:slrnd232ru.ngj.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x4.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> On 2005-02-26, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>><snip>
>>> I thought I'd revive the question. What do we all think?
>>
>> Our first reaction (Markus's, amusingly enough) was that it depends on
>> the
>> brain--however, plants are 'alive', and then have no brain nor
>> intelligence,
>> yet are alive.
>
> They have an neural network and *do* react to external input.

*blinks* Plants? Describe this neural network, please.

And take bacteria for a different example, then.

> Intelligence is a matter of definition, of course.

*nods...* And (we think) irrelevant to the status of being alive.

>> In a phrase, then: Darwinian evolution. In practice, this probably
>> necessitates the potential to evolve beyond certain boundaries which may
>> or
>> may not be in place in reference to Norns and the others.
>
> May or may not? What do *you* believe?

We don't know enough about how the game(s) was/were built. However, bd more
or less sums up the same or a similar point of view:

<quote>
FWIW, I feel the norns aren't alive, simply because the environment
doesn't have the right level of complexity. Too much is hardcoded, and
too much is allowed to run free. Life must collect energy from its
environment and process it. Yet, a norn can gain a mutation (highlander
norns, anyone?) and run free of its environment. The environment also
prevents a complete evolution into a different kind of organism.
</quote>

Not certain we agree about the highlander part (though we're also against
it, for possibly slightly different reasons), but the hardcoding part...
yes. It's the hardcoding that we feel holds norns back from 'life' as we
and the other organisms on and in the Earth know/experience it.

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:slrnd232or.ngj.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x4.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> On 2005-02-26, nornagon <nornagon@gmail.com> wrote:
>> nornagon InSaNiTised:
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>>
>>> I thought I'd revive the question. What do we all think?
>>>
>>
>> I think that life, as we think of it, is defined by consciousness and an
>> ability
>> to learn and develop in unexpected ways. For example, we can learn to
>> ride a
>> bicycle. We can learn to cook a pizza. However, you won't find norns
>> harvesting
>> grain or planting seeds, will you?
>>
>> In my view, Albia is not complete enough to support true life. The norns'
>> world
>> is too limited for them to be considered truly 'alive'.
>
> Hm... what would happen if you put humans in a really restricted
> environment :-?

It depends on the laws of physics. Even if a human were locked in a box
with no other objects, that human's biology, physiology, would still act in
certain ways. Have several hundred humans in really restricted
environments, and in a few million years, the organisms would likely be
vastly different from the humans that were put in there.

However, if you took analogy humans, and went over their bodies and brains
with a... augh, we can't think of what could do such a thing.

Take a human, make a... a digital copy of him/her, maybe, and then make
vast chunks of the brain hardcoded, lock large parts of the genome in place
and somehow--controlling all laws of physics themselves--disallow all but
certain kinds of mutations, instead of allowing humans to learn to walk on
their own, instead lock them into predetermined 'gaits' (which reminds us;
that's another thing which should be removed and replaced by the way it
actually works in real life)...

I/We would definitely be hesitant to call that new creature 'alive' any
more.

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

emmel wrote:

> Bringing the ant out is probably more of a problem than dropping it. The
> ant can survive the drop without any serious wounds, but it dies of
> loosing contact (or not knowing the way back for that matter) to the
> hive.

Well, as long as the ant doesn't find its way back to my house and
starts bringing along all its friends :-DD

Thomas
- --
"All my life, I've always wondered, What it would be like to fire a
ballistic missile" - Wonderfully colored plastic war toys, The Dead
Milkmen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQB5AwUBQiHbxAEP2l8iXKAJAQFZZQMcDmkHM2wNAVJPj8P59O4kxkJHyy1p/Ni6
vvUia8ETdyeSni4qSYSyfF9EperxfLyGSPjZqMOMvn7KIusmQ4PqnpRvs1rQ0xQM
jnN0ZZmg9rxuX0aOWGNpmSOaxWNExlsLH7OeiQ==
=wg00
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Vadim wrote:
> Thomas J. Boschloo wrote:
>
>
>
>>>I must have been playing too much Messiah ;-0
>
> Nice game

I also enjoyed Sacrifice from Shiny very much. Stratos was my favorite
deity to serve.. Messiah is also from Shiny IIRC! They make cool games..

Thomas
- --
"All my life, I've always wondered, What it would be like to fire a
ballistic missile" - Wonderfully colored plastic war toys, The Dead
Milkmen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQB5AwUBQiHf9QEP2l8iXKAJAQE6ZAMfbAygYgeoLJq3sBubH+geN9WM67D7I8lf
UgZQdyp83Ou9fkqd18yw/N2e4xsgEGBxqPrNBuT5uoimYkkZ/8FMsp3BoG5TAQA5
U10C4GIH+7AeGbKXWlW3JrNulwOfwN+1GJ2ncw==
=p4Ye
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

bd wrote:
> Thomas J. Boschloo wrote:
> | nornagon wrote:
> |
> |>>Here's something Steve Grand wrote way back in 1997
> |>>(http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.games.creatures/browse_frm/thread/fa64f71ac3135322/6c80cec0c5d7dfe5?q=&_done=%2Fgroups%3Fenc_author%3DNEh2bRgAAABpnzTRIR4pTfVqJv-9flJkWKLNRqB-u4_S4z0CNL-NQg%26&_doneTitle=Back+to+Search&&d#6c80cec0c5d7dfe5)
>
> |
> |
> | <snipped long, but very interesting question>
> |
> |>>I thought I'd revive the question. What do we all think?
> |
> |
> | You would need to device some kind of Turing Test where people are
> | pretending to be Norns and other Norns are executed by a computer. If an
> | observer can't tell the real Norns from the human operated Norns, the
> | Norns should be considered alive.
> |
> | To put it another way: If a human can fool an observer into thinking
> | that he or she is a Norn then the assumption that a Norn is not alive
> | will result in the conclusion that the Human is also not alive. This is
> | clearly false (but how do you proof Humans themselves are alive?), thus
> | the opposite must be true and the Norns would be alive!
>
> Unfortunately, this doesn't quite work. To take it to an extreme:
> Put a rock and a human ar computer consoles. Tell the human to pretend
> to be a rock at a console. Since a person on the other end can't tell
> the difference, by your logic, the rock must be alive.

I guess the test would be inconclusive in this case as there was nothing
to observe.

> Intelligent life can reduce the extent of its capabilities it shows.
> Because of this, your test fails.

You could also fake an IQ test to have a much lower score than your real
IQ. Still, the test is useful for determining someones intelligence. I
would be more worried about humans that would start philosophical
conversations with the keyboard operators instead of the usual 'Dab flib'.

> Moreover, if someone made a non-alive sentient thing of some sort (AI
> program maybe?), would that not change the conclusion of the test if it
> was connected instead of the human? Even though it may be acting
> identically to the human?

My point would be that the non-alive sentient thing should be considered
alive since you cannot tell it from the real thing! That is the whole
point of the Turing test where an interrogator behind a terminal has to
tell a computer from a human by asking questions.

> | Of course, the humans would have the same input neurons the Norns would
> | have, otherwise the humans would have an unfair advantage over the
> | Norns. Their actions would also be limited to the things a Norn can do.
> | AFAIK language is hardcoded in the Norns and not part of the
> | neurological brain.
>
> I can also argue the human will always fail at this - we just can't
> emulate another being at the speed needed, and could not interface with
> the console fast enough.

You could also make the creatures game turn based. It would take very
long though I guess..

Regards,
Thomas
- --
"All my life, I've always wondered, What it would be like to fire a
ballistic missile" - Wonderfully colored plastic war toys, The Dead
Milkmen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQB5AwUBQiHgIwEP2l8iXKAJAQEQqwMgjhXZGU6ZA7Ki8hjHIXkFUMKJUYLNMQ6Q
6LqJYeI7I0TtZgb6/v0XBNjrj8tStNY3UHwadA9WAnfaBkPpO1QsKlkvpJEIHfew
5CoLKBgsu5klbsXcnpGhBLflWQCYggMuP0JYPg==
=HoXI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Vadim wrote:
> Thomas J. Boschloo wrote:

<snip>

>>I also enjoyed Sacrifice from Shiny very much. Stratos was my
>>favorite deity to serve.. Messiah is also from Shiny IIRC! They
>>make cool games..
>
> Hehe, got that one too :-D
>
> Great stuff, but only got it a few weeks ago, and managed to lose
> the CD after I finished it with Persephone. Darn. Will have to
> look again when I have more free time.

Persephone is soft. But what a temper! Has been a while since I served
her though, her dragons where pretty cool!

Did you also play Oni by Bungie (same publisher Gathering of
Developers). I think the main character has a great attitude, but I
never got to finishing the game (yet). I like Konoko a lot better then
e.g. Lara Croft. Never finished any of the Tomb Raider games, too much
puzzling and searching in fain..

I see Shiny also did the Enter the Matrix game. I played that for a bit
and generally liked it.

Thomas
- --
"All my life, I've always wondered, What it would be like to fire a
ballistic missile" - Wonderfully colored plastic war toys, The Dead
Milkmen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQB5AwUBQiH8gAEP2l8iXKAJAQHE5AMfSyzQCbnJ3dOjz7Uf3WSN8Kl9nNSgeXQE
7IvYSKenTbCZz9rqIO1/70zRrUHn/l5SmXQ2qcAF5a+OM7uXEqza5ucszjeqAWYO
OKjerOphPPL1Tt7c/bzAEvhGJbPvdHiIGiA4hw==
=DeBg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2005-02-27, Thomas J. Boschloo <nospam@hccnet.nl.invalid> wrote:
>
> bd wrote:
>> Thomas J. Boschloo wrote:
>> | nornagon wrote:
>> |
>> Intelligent life can reduce the extent of its capabilities it shows.
>> Because of this, your test fails.
>
> You could also fake an IQ test to have a much lower score than your real
> IQ. Still, the test is useful for determining someones intelligence. I
> would be more worried about humans that would start philosophical
> conversations with the keyboard operators instead of the usual 'Dab flib'.

No, no. That's 'flib dat'. And *then* comes the philosophical discussion


>> Moreover, if someone made a non-alive sentient thing of some sort (AI
>> program maybe?), would that not change the conclusion of the test if it
>> was connected instead of the human? Even though it may be acting
>> identically to the human?
>
> My point would be that the non-alive sentient thing should be considered
> alive since you cannot tell it from the real thing! That is the whole
> point of the Turing test where an interrogator behind a terminal has to
> tell a computer from a human by asking questions.

And then there was Eliza.

>> | Of course, the humans would have the same input neurons the Norns would
>> | have, otherwise the humans would have an unfair advantage over the
>> | Norns. Their actions would also be limited to the things a Norn can do.
>> | AFAIK language is hardcoded in the Norns and not part of the
>> | neurological brain.
>>
>> I can also argue the human will always fail at this - we just can't
>> emulate another being at the speed needed, and could not interface with
>> the console fast enough.
>
> You could also make the creatures game turn based. It would take very
> long though I guess..

Turn based intelligence. How... convincing. (It doesn't work, for
heaven's sake. Turn based is nonsense.)
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better...
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2005-02-27, Thomas J. Boschloo <nospam@hccnet.nl.invalid> wrote:
>
> emmel wrote:
>
>> Bringing the ant out is probably more of a problem than dropping it. The
>> ant can survive the drop without any serious wounds, but it dies of
>> loosing contact (or not knowing the way back for that matter) to the
>> hive.
>
> Well, as long as the ant doesn't find its way back to my house and
> starts bringing along all its friends :-DD

And mark their ways with scents. Without these tracks they are pretty
much dead.
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better...
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2005-02-27, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:slrnd232or.ngj.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x4.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>> On 2005-02-26, nornagon <nornagon@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> nornagon InSaNiTised:
>>>
>>><snip>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I thought I'd revive the question. What do we all think?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I think that life, as we think of it, is defined by consciousness and an
>>> ability
>>> to learn and develop in unexpected ways. For example, we can learn to
>>> ride a
>>> bicycle. We can learn to cook a pizza. However, you won't find norns
>>> harvesting
>>> grain or planting seeds, will you?
>>>
>>> In my view, Albia is not complete enough to support true life. The norns'
>>> world
>>> is too limited for them to be considered truly 'alive'.
>>
>> Hm... what would happen if you put humans in a really restricted
>> environment :-?
>
> It depends on the laws of physics. Even if a human were locked in a box
> with no other objects, that human's biology, physiology, would still act in
> certain ways. Have several hundred humans in really restricted
> environments, and in a few million years, the organisms would likely be
> vastly different from the humans that were put in there.
>
> However, if you took analogy humans, and went over their bodies and brains
> with a... augh, we can't think of what could do such a thing.
>
> Take a human, make a... a digital copy of him/her, maybe, and then make
> vast chunks of the brain hardcoded, lock large parts of the genome in place
> and somehow--controlling all laws of physics themselves--disallow all but
> certain kinds of mutations, instead of allowing humans to learn to walk on
> their own, instead lock them into predetermined 'gaits' (which reminds us;
> that's another thing which should be removed and replaced by the way it
> actually works in real life)...
>
> I/We would definitely be hesitant to call that new creature 'alive' any
> more.

I was thinking more of the grays in DeusEx, if you know what I mean.
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better...
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2005-02-27, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:slrnd232ru.ngj.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x4.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>> On 2005-02-26, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>>><snip>
>>>> I thought I'd revive the question. What do we all think?
>>>
>>> Our first reaction (Markus's, amusingly enough) was that it depends on
>>> the
>>> brain--however, plants are 'alive', and then have no brain nor
>>> intelligence,
>>> yet are alive.
>>
>> They have an neural network and *do* react to external input.
>
> *blinks* Plants? Describe this neural network, please.

Something about emitters and receptors for certain ions like Mg... Hey,
I'm no biologist. Interesting enough a certain plant like being (they
call it "slime fungus" around here, but it isn't really, neither it is a
plant) managed to do the labirinth thing. Now that's really amazing.
(They put it in a labirinth with some food and it found the shortest way
by growing/letting parts die of or retracting - whatever you can call it
- to find the ideal way. A kind of IQ test.)

> And take bacteria for a different example, then.

Bacteria have no neuros, hence no neuronal network.

>> Intelligence is a matter of definition, of course.
>
> *nods...* And (we think) irrelevant to the status of being alive.

Yes, you'd probably call anything intelligent "alive".

>>> In a phrase, then: Darwinian evolution. In practice, this probably
>>> necessitates the potential to evolve beyond certain boundaries which may
>>> or
>>> may not be in place in reference to Norns and the others.
>>
>> May or may not? What do *you* believe?
>
> We don't know enough about how the game(s) was/were built. However, bd more
> or less sums up the same or a similar point of view:
>
><quote>
> FWIW, I feel the norns aren't alive, simply because the environment
> doesn't have the right level of complexity. Too much is hardcoded, and
> too much is allowed to run free. Life must collect energy from its
> environment and process it. Yet, a norn can gain a mutation (highlander
> norns, anyone?) and run free of its environment. The environment also
> prevents a complete evolution into a different kind of organism.
></quote>
>
> Not certain we agree about the highlander part (though we're also against
> it, for possibly slightly different reasons), but the hardcoding part...
> yes. It's the hardcoding that we feel holds norns back from 'life' as we
> and the other organisms on and in the Earth know/experience it.

The question is in how far we are hardcoded.
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better...
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

emmel wrote:
> On 2005-02-27, Thomas J. Boschloo <nospam@hccnet.nl.invalid> wrote:
>
>>emmel wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Bringing the ant out is probably more of a problem than dropping it. The
>>>ant can survive the drop without any serious wounds, but it dies of
>>>loosing contact (or not knowing the way back for that matter) to the
>>>hive.
>>
>>Well, as long as the ant doesn't find its way back to my house and
>>starts bringing along all its friends :-DD
>
>
> And mark their ways with scents. Without these tracks they are pretty
> much dead.

I saw on television recently that they can also recognize large
landmarks. I think my flat is a pretty good landmark but I drop them
from the back of my flat

Will have to do some experiments with ants next time!
Thomas
- --
"All my life, I've always wondered, What it would be like to fire a
ballistic missile" - Wonderfully colored plastic war toys, The Dead
Milkmen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQB5AwUBQiIjYQEP2l8iXKAJAQFcfQMgoatTnyCs81TX6+kGhsM6c92LrRHMLRir
DEc+M7WjTgnVDaJDdNlupINX7l2W3cWF3RyPBqsR9n+hkMzDplfMSHKNwkzhPzfg
xTrU8VP0wa2aeuzD4NU235qHfMjpa2Hifg+QHg==
=JLgM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

emmel wrote:
<snip>

> Turn based intelligence. How... convincing. (It doesn't work, for
> heaven's sake. Turn based is nonsense.)

Turn based? I meant to say 'Turing based'
<hides behind bush>
Thomas
- --
"All my life, I've always wondered, What it would be like to fire a
ballistic missile" - Wonderfully colored plastic war toys, The Dead
Milkmen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQB5AwUBQiIjqAEP2l8iXKAJAQE+BwMfcd2tOdrQ1ohK6Pv7kasY3X4cslkOB07j
BmaR/8tNxKj6I24ctfauGL0wHsCTqef6elQA5WIUJNJcSFPgBlvlJeey258miRb8
K/u2mZEHKP/WQHRwPWCpM0sifpgsMTOyoZNncA==
=JMvG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----