Comments by "Reasoner Enlightened" (@reasonerenlightened2456) on "The Top 5 Programming Languages in 2021 to get a job" video.

  1. Why the programming languages are still not self-aware in the 21-st century !!!!
    5
  2. ​ @iorekby  Well, one AI could be "debugging" and explaining another AI? The human becomes a consultant at most, but more likely the human becomes 'the customer' of the AI.
    3
  3. ​ @iorekby  You are unable to escape the mindset that a human is using a programming language as a tool. The paradigm I speak of is to have the programming language observe, study, mimic, anticipate what the human is doing with it. (Something similar has been popular in industrial control systems for decades now i.e. the controlled processes and its controllers (control devices) are modelled by AI which predicts the next state of the system. Then the AI recursively improves its own performance by comparing the prediction it made to the real "events". The process is both hierarchical and recursive. It also involves perpetual cycles of Analysis and Synthesis of the inputs, outputs and the internal state of the modelling system. ) Since you still do not get it I WILL TELL YOU how to do it. 1) Give a human a task which is to be programmed/modelled on a computer. 2) Give a second human the task to model the thinking (the process) of the first human as he is complementing the task assigned to him. 3) Give a third human the task to model the thinking (the process) of the second human as he is complementing the task assigned to him. 4).... continue the recursive process until sufficient level of abstraction is reached. 5) Repeat steps from 1 to 4 with another task. 6) Finally Give a human the task to model on a computer the process that identifies similarities and differences between all completed tasks and all models created in steps 1 to 5. 7) Then go to step 1 with the human from step 6 . IT IS SO SIMPLE . WHY DO I HAVE TO EXPLAIN IT TO ANYONE. Why it has not been done. Get on with it.
    2
  4.  @sunsetsleeper  We shouldn't even have to ask. It is supposed to anticipate us....like humans do when working in a team.
    2
  5. ​ @iorekby  You are incorrect to classify the approach as "reductive" because it creates a by-product which replaces the human in the next iteration of the process. Thinking about the human thinking is not for everybody. (I will illustrate how unaware you are with an anecdote back from the days of the Expert systems. Some 'knowledge engineers' went into a biological laboratory and spoke with the specialists about what their thought process is as they plan activities, analyse data and produce results. The result was a set of about 400 production rules which make a computer program as knowledgeable as all those specialist put together. Once that fact was revealed to the bio-specialist they remarked, " We thought we are doing complex decision making that require years of study and complex thinking. We did not expect that all we do is to use only 400 rules.") Your comments remind me of those bio-specialists.
    1
  6.  @iorekby  It is simple tg do just not cheap, or does such consideration avoid your mind too.
    1
  7.  @iorekby  You think google would pay to be taken out of business. Are you thick or you just need more time to think between your responses. Self-aware programming language is the end of the software empires.
    1
  8.  @iorekby  Ultimately Google harvest profits from the lifeforce of the human beings. It is what any 'business' does by design. The intellectual limitations of your thinking are so apparent now.
    1
  9. ​ @iorekby  What makes you look bad is that somehow you managed to interpret as "proposal for a solution" the outlining of a SIMPLE framework for a research project into a new paradigm of software development. (i.e. self-aware programming languages)
    1
  10.  @iorekby  re-post. You deny feasibility and then you demand more info about trivia. It indicates very limited thinking on your part. There is no cost effective way to break through that kind of thinking. ( Weizenbaum would have never created Elisa if he was thinking like you. John McCarthy would have never created Lisp if he was thinking like you, etc.) I am speaking about a new paradigm of software development you think about profits and trivia.
    1
  11.  @iorekby  You continue to claim non-feasibility. (human flying is impossible. It is just a grand claim. Prove it.) So Pathetic.
    1
  12. ​ @danielrazulay  GPT3 is a "reactive" system. It still does not have any 'situational awareness' about the "context"/the world/ the environment it operates in. GPT3 is a step in the right direction but does not address the core of the issue. Self-awareness creates the ability to ask sensible questions and the ability to seek answers. (For example: What happens, Why it happens, who/what is involved, who/what is affected, how , etc.) GPT3 "asks" only limited "Questions" like " Which Question-Answer pair I generate is a close match to the Q-A pair provided as a sample?" As I said GPT3 is still just a reactive system (i.e. it waits for input in order to generate output). Self-awareness requires generative behavior like "the ability to ask sensible questions and seek their answers".
    1
  13.  @danielrazulay  Everybody is desperately focussed on making computer languages which allow the computers to provide answers. Nobody yet tries to make computer languages which aim at asking sensible questions. (Let me remind you which is the first step in the scientific method for knowing stuff about the world. Step 1: Ask a question.) Make computer languages which observe the human user, ask questions and seek explanations as part of their journey to self-awareness.
    1
  14.  @iorekby  It is pathetic how you reason. You ask for irrelevant details about a simple approach to a new paradigm. You are just not there yet intellectually. What exactly confuses you so much.
    1
  15. ​ @iorekby  Also, "solution" and "paradigm" are words with a very distinct and different meaning. Such "nuances" between words clearly have not yet reached your ability for thought processing. What confuses you so much.
    1
  16.  @iorekby  What exactly confuses you.
    1
  17. ​ @iorekby  What exactly confuses you. (Do you wonder how to make a bit with a mind of its own? Would it choose to be a one or a zero and for how long? )
    1
  18. ​ @iorekby  I can only point to the moon it is your problem that you can not comprehend beyond the pointing finger.
    1
  19.  @iorekby  And you continue to be confused without the intellectual ability to articulate your confusion into sensible reasoning.
    1
  20. Why the programming languages are still not self-aware in the 21-st century ?!?
    1
  21. ​ @sallylauper8222  We are well overdue for languages that have situational awareness (i.e. awareness of the context in which actions are taken and events are happening).
    1
  22.  @sallylauper8222  NetLogo (My comments are getting deleted here).
    1
  23. Why the programming languages are still not self-aware in the 21-st century !!!! That should really trouble you all.
    1