Genady

You're right guys. I've made a mistake.

Right. Its response would be correct let's say in 85% of cases. "Correct" meaning similar to how some humans would respond. Yes, humans do it differently, but this is not what AI is about. It is only about the outcome. (disclaimer: I'm playing a devil's advocate here)

I'm curious about a physics of this. Does mind create a field outside your body such that this field has all the detailed information about the mind's state?

I guess, to resolve this a system developer first would feed the computer with 10 million examples of such statements and various human responses to them, and the computer will develop a pattern of how to response and will apply it next time it stumbles upon something like that.

Like most religions and ideologies, Marxism evolved and branched. I learned the official version of the КПСС, Communist Party of Soviet Union, founded by Lenin. According to this, Marxism consists of three parts: philosophy (not a political philosophy, but rather dialectic materialism), economic theory, and social theory. After the revolution of 1917, the economic theory became purely academic, the philosophy became a demagogic lingo, and an active essence of Marxism concentrated in the social theory. Its main point was, building a happy communist society. Is this a religion?

One might be out, one or more could be in. "Finland will take a decision about whether to apply to join the U.S.-led NATO alliance in the next few weeks, Prime Minister Sanna Marin said on Wednesday, underlining a shift in security perspectives since Russia's invasion of Ukraine." Finland to make decision on NATO entry in coming weeks, not months | Reuters

This is so, if my understanding of what constitutes a religion is thrown away. What is a defining feature then? How do I know what is and what is not a religion? Can we apply that test to Marxism (because I know about it more than I ever wanted)?

Thanks a lot. Downloaded. I'll study it. Maybe interpolate-extrapolate expresses what I mean by external-internal patterns -- we'll see.

OK. This answers my questions clearly. You don't know arithmetic. And you don't know the meaning of being Newtonian. You don't know. You just talk. Talk and drink, drink and talk. Don't bother to apologize again - this was the second time already - or even reply. I will not talk to you anymore. Ever.

1. What does it have to do with being "practically Newtonian"? 2. "if I don't have two sheep and I take away two sheep, how do I suddenly have four sheep?" -- you don't; why would you think you do? looks like an arithmetic's error to me; do you know arithmetic?

I have a vague "Hypothesis 1" regarding the human intelligence's advantage compared to AI: AI discovers patterns in input data, while we discover patterns in our own thinking. IOW, the brain discovers patterns in its own activities. Patterns in the input data is a small subset of the latter.

In what way "karma is practically Newtonian"?

Is your name Henry M. Morris? Did you write it in 2003? From the OP: "All this means that the chance that any kind of a 200-component integrated functioning organism could be developed by mutation and natural selection just once, anywhere in the world, in all the assumed expanse of geologic time, is less than one chance out of a billion trillion." From The Mathematical Impossibility Of Evolution | The Institute for Creation Research (icr.org): "All this means that the chance that any kind of a 200-component integrated functioning organism could be developed by mutation and natural selection just once, anywhere in the world, in all the assumed expanse of geologic time, is less than one chance out of a billion trillion."

Is your name Casey Luskin? Did you write it in 2014? From the OP: "[] the Intelligent design movement is producing both empirical and theoretical research showing that when multiple mutations are required before conferring any advantage on an organism, the “waiting time” for those mutations is often beyond the time available over the entire history of the Earth." From A Reader Asks: Can Microevolutionary Changes Add Up to Macroevolutionary Change? | Evolution News: "The ID movement is producing both empirical and theoretical research showing that when multiple mutations are required before conferring any advantage on an organism, the “waiting time” for those mutations is often beyond the time available over the history of the Earth."

I appreciate what you say. Unfortunately, I cannot verbalize my "gut feeling" about it. Something like a difference between countable and uncountable infinities... It is not only "creativity", not even mostly about it. My doubts are about other human abilities, such as:

Here is an "official" answer: "Many lay people in Russia think of Ukrainian as a mere dialect of Russian, and a substandard one at that. Linguists, on the other hand, treat Ukrainian as a separate language." Pereltsvaig, Asya. Languages of the World (p. 37) Also, "most speakers of Ukrainian have no problem understanding Russian, but the average Russian – who has not been exposed to much Ukrainian – might understand only bits and pieces of their interlocutor’s Ukrainian speech." Pereltsvaig, Asya. Languages of the World (p. 7) Being fluent in Russian, I cannot understand Ukrainian except for the "bits and pieces."

I think, in principle a robot could do any one of these things, and then they can be combined in one robot. In principle.

Yes, zero interest in your life and its value.

Yes.

Because I have had some interest in the question of rationality of a belief in religion (by an atheist). I have a big ZERO interest in your struggles with life.

Then change a title.

OT

I don't know what skeletons are in your closet, but they bother you.

All or not all, two or not two, battle or not battle - does not depend on anyone's level of understanding. What it has to do with karma? What does the phrase "karma is wrong" mean?

What he said is incorrect. IOW, wrong.