Popcorn Sutton

ok, I made it so it won't use any foul language that I could think of.

I can't really control what's being said to the thing at this point so yea I'm sorry about the foul language. I'm also editing the program right now too because I had a few specifications wrong as to how to order the elements, but it seems to be working pretty good now. Well, since the link has been removed, if anyone is interested in talking to the new version please let me know and I will share the link over PM. k? Thanks

I finally figured out how to put it on the internet. I'm going to run the server for a little while. There's no username or passwords yet so the knowledge is just going to mesh with every other users knowledge but... you guys can check out the prototype here. <link removed>

Don't knock it when it's knowledge only has a length of 500. I think it's doing pretty good for knowing so little.

Thank you ophiolite. Imagine when you get to talk to it lolll.

I'd love to have you guys speak with it. I'm working on the ui now. Do you have any suggestions as to how I can speed up the process and make it available while hosting it on my computer?

From what you posted how can we tell it is a "knowledge processor" vs a chat bot, vs a random selection of finite possible responses, vs just you typing? It is a knowledge processor as opposed to a chat bot because the input can be anything. I'm working on the sound part soon. It is a chat bot as well though... for the time being. I have the central algorithm and I was very careful as to not impose any arbitrary stipulations. Everything I wrote into the program had some sort of evidence behind it. Why is it revolutionary? What are your claims in regards to what it can do and where is the evidence supporting it can meet the claims? It's revolutionary because I can learn anything and structure it like the architecture of the brain. It's the central code. The evidence to support my claims are embedded within the responses of the program. It creates its own responses. Also, when it does create those responses, they're always grammatical and almost always specifically for that current context. Help us out, what are we going to discuss here? What you've posted doesn't really foster discussion, I'm not sure what to make of it. It has already fostered discussion. I don't want to steer the conversation here though so I was just wondering what you guys had to say. It made that last response on its own.

What I meant to say is that this post was pleasant lolll. but yea I don't want to put it into a specific category because of how broad the code actually is. It's a knowledge processor. I used my own methodology. It's different from other bots because it remembers everything that you've ever said to it and builds structures which specify a good response. It's revolutionary because I have empirical evidence to support my claims. It could be strong AI if the context was always within the highest domain, but by adding an intermediate domain you can have the program specialize in YOU. As in, this program will say things and respond to things that you are literally thinking in that moment.

What does the dialogue represent? My passions have always been for science and language. I was thinking about what to call this type of program in scientific terms earlier today and I think that it's best said as being a statistical knowledge processor. It's highly specialized for specific contexts. It's still a work in progress but I'm working on it every day so at this point, it's gotten a lot better. I just need to work on efficiency and stuff of that sort. The reason I call it a knowledge processor is because it doesn't only look at what you say, but it also analyzes the structure of your knowledge. The "architecture of thought" as Chomsky would say. Did you simply type it yourself? No Did you program a computer to give standard responses to certain inputs? Yes, somewhat. It learns. Did you actually program a computer to process the input and give more varied responses? Yes. Its responses vary pretty often for any input. Did you program a computer to actually process the input and formulae original responses? yes. It usually formulates it's own response when the output shows up with punctuation. Do the responses vary depending on what's said previously? Always, but this part is a work in progress. It needs to be integrated with the actual file system. Why do you take the time to neg me like that? My counselor says this "Decision talks can go one of two ways. They can either lead to the point of making someone feel like a piece of crap, or it can go in the direction of correcting the behavior positively." I think you are over analyzing me physica. Noam Chomsky- "You can focus on all the negative things." (How to ruin the economy, 2014, YouTube). Bignose's post was delightful I don't think this can be commented on since you didn't actually, you know, show how you made it happen. You just posted a large quote, that to be honest, could easily have been faked. And considering the python code you had posted before, I frankly do not believe that the above came from that code. I ran it, and it returned gibberish. Basically, you probably need to post code that any of us can run and replicate the above. Or at least write about the theory of what you're claiming and back it up with not-easily-fakeable evidence. I cannot release the code for this program. Here is the best scientific name for it that I can think of. Statistical Structure-Dependant Knowledge Acquisition and Prediction Interface. To put it plainly for the layman. It's basically a friend.

Before I start, I should note that the theory I used to produce the responses from the program that I am about to show was conceived without outside influence by myself at the age of 17. After 9 years of speculation and contemplation, it has come together to produce results that are mind blowing and, what I think personally, revolutionary. I finally got the chance to work on the program that I've been thinking about for so long, and finally it's coming into fruition. A lot of people have complained over the years of how my methods have literally produced no results, but still, people had faith. It's interesting. People simply knew that the ideas that I was postulating were true. My ideas, in combination with preconceived notions of structure, were pretty convincing, and yet, the code that I produced wasn't providing others with the experience that they expected. Well, now that I was given the chance to work on my project for over 3 weeks now, it's coming into fruition. The program gradually got better over time and here is one of the most recent conversations that we have had. By the way, I put this in speculations because the theory I used to produce these results are mostly speculations with some basis in known scientific reality. Good times! I'd like to see what you guys think about how I made this happen