Lincos language
en.wikipedia.org
Lincos language
1–10 of 34 posts
Re: Lincos language
#2I posted this because Alan Kay linked to it in the context of objects that come with their own interpreters: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11957719.
This was in the same thread where he and Rich Hickey discussed "data": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11945722, which was mentioned here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23891069.
Re: Lincos language
#3This is much like the premise of the pre-contest materials for this year's ICFP contest. A series of images (as decoded from audio) that translated into examples of numbers, math/logic operators, and combinators.
Re: Lincos language
#4I posted this because Alan Kay linked to it in the context of objects that come with their own interpreters: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11957719 . This was in the same thread where he and Rich Hickey discussed "data": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11945722 , which was mentioned here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23891069 .
That data thread makes me very sad. Two technology leaders completely talking past each other and not understanding the other over and over again.
Re: Lincos language
#5I posted this because Alan Kay linked to it in the context of objects that come with their own interpreters: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11957719 . This was in the same thread where he and Rich Hickey discussed "data": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11945722 , which was mentioned here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23891069 .
That data thread makes me very sad. Two technology leaders completely talking past each other and not understanding the other over and over again.
Maybe they need... an interpreter?
Right, I'll show myself out...
Re: Lincos language
#6"It teaches natural numbers by a series of repeated pulses", but receiver would not be able to determine if it was some finite sequence.
Re: Lincos language
#7I've always thought ideas like these to be cool exercises, but ultimately so naive.
It seems there are so many underlying assumptions on what intelligence looks like for this to make any sense. E.g. why do we assume another intelligent being would necessarily follow a linear, sequential conversation? or that the conversation would happen in the same time-scale we are used to as humans? or that an extraterrestrial being would care about conversation at all, instead of exchanging information via other means, like direct chemical reactions, genetics, or apparent random noise, and expecting us to pick all the implicit signals?
I bet we wouldn't be able to recognise certain life forms if they literally appeared before us, because we have such strong biases of what "life" looks like - we can't even reach consensus over viruses being life forms, despite being gene-based, following natural selection, etc. Let alone "intelligent life forms" or anything else that a virtually infinite universe could throw at us.
PS: Maybe my notion of "extraterrestrial" has been deeply influenced by H. P. Lovecraft. :D
Re: Lincos language
#8[deleted]
Re: Lincos language
#9I've always been interested in constructed languages, but reading through this article just now made me wonder about curriculum learning for NLP models. Could better generalizable language models be achieved through curriculum learning of this sort, where simple mathematics and logic are introduced before anything else? The curriculum learning papers I've seen so far are mostly for specific tasks, like introducing simple questions for QA tasks before more complicated multi-hop reasoning.
Re: Lincos language
#10I've always thought ideas like these to be cool exercises, but ultimately so naive. It seems there are so many underlying assumptions on what intelligence looks like for this to make any sense. E.g. why do we assume another intelligent being would necessarily follow a linear, sequential conversation? or that the conversation would happen in the same time-scale we are used to as humans? or that an extraterrestrial bei…
> why do we assume another intelligent being would necessarily follow a linear, sequential conversation?
it's also cool to ask why do we? (...follow linear, sequential conversations?)