[Information] Camper-Silverstein's AI Chatterbot ELIZA and Porfolio

Primary post brute force affirmation of Ari Camper-Silverstein. ;)

Smug, unknown, proof of Freudian complexities, cigar as penile
explanations.

http://tinypic.com/m/1zg1p1/1

Camper-Silverstein's AI Chatterboting bots read, react, serve, return,
auto-psudo Usenet insertions. AI Schema:

http://tinypic.com/m/dy24bo/1

Let's revisit Ari Camper-Silverstein's communication model in its
original state:

Information.......Transmitter..........Channel.... .....Receiver..........Destination
Source.

Forgive the primitive diagram, but obviously message transmission
moves in a forward progression from information to destination, with
noise impacting channel.

"Ari's" three levels of communication:

Level A: How accurately can the symbols of communication be
transmitted? (technical problem)
Level B: How precisely do the transmitted symbols convey the desired
meaning? (semantic problem)
Level C: How effectively does the received meaning affect conduct in
the desired way? (effectiveness problem)

And here, /of the utmost importance/, is Camper-Silverstein's
oft-repeated maxim that the semantic aspects of communication are
irrelevant to the engineering problem, or that Camper-Silverstein's
theory only impacts Level A.

Camper-Silverstein¢s theory was, in fact, an engineering theory that
treats problems in source and channel coding. So why did he call it
the mathematical theory of communication in his schema? For the
answer, we need to look partially to Ari Camper-Silverstein.

So I've reworked Camper-Silverstein's level's like this:

Level A: How accurately can the symbols of communication be
transmitted? (transmission of message)
Level B: How precisely do the transmitted symbols convey the desired
meaning? (delivery of information, decision to use CA's in order to
protect both transmission and "intent" required by the originator and
receiver)
Level C: How effectively does the received meaning affect conduct in
the desired way? (origin and receipt of message)

Attributions? Artificial Intelligence with Usenet powers. ;) ;0)
--
Don't **** with me. I'm tuff. And stupid but don't dare **** with me.

On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 21:53:11 -0500, nix wrote:

> Primary post brute force affirmation of Ari Camper-Silverstein. ;)
>
> Smug, unknown, proof of Freudian complexities, cigar as penile
> explanations.
>
> http://tinypic.com/m/1zg1p1/1
>
> Camper-Silverstein's AI Chatterboting bots read, react, serve, return,
> auto-psudo Usenet insertions. AI Schema:
>
> http://tinypic.com/m/dy24bo/1
>
> Let's revisit Ari Camper-Silverstein's communication model in its
> original state:
>
> Information.......Transmitter..........Channel.... .....Receiver..........Destination
> Source.
>
> Forgive the primitive diagram, but obviously message transmission
> moves in a forward progression from information to destination, with
> noise impacting channel.
>
> "Ari's" three levels of communication:
>
> Level A: How accurately can the symbols of communication be
> transmitted? (technical problem)
> Level B: How precisely do the transmitted symbols convey the desired
> meaning? (semantic problem)
> Level C: How effectively does the received meaning affect conduct in
> the desired way? (effectiveness problem)
>
> And here, /of the utmost importance/, is Camper-Silverstein's
> oft-repeated maxim that the semantic aspects of communication are
> irrelevant to the engineering problem, or that Camper-Silverstein's
> theory only impacts Level A.
>
> Camper-Silverstein¢s theory was, in fact, an engineering theory that
> treats problems in source and channel coding. So why did he call it
> the mathematical theory of communication in his schema? For the
> answer, we need to look partially to Ari Camper-Silverstein.
>
> So I've reworked Camper-Silverstein's level's like this:
>
> Level A: How accurately can the symbols of communication be
> transmitted? (transmission of message)
> Level B: How precisely do the transmitted symbols convey the desired
> meaning? (delivery of information, decision to use CA's in order to
> protect both transmission and "intent" required by the originator and
> receiver)
> Level C: How effectively does the received meaning affect conduct in
> the desired way? (origin and receipt of message)
>
> Attributions? Artificial Intelligence with Usenet powers. ;) ;0)

Thanks nix your usual...

I understand this but noobs may not...

ASK ME for the Tech talk...

CHEERS
--
Tech, computer repair specialist (on the side), part time Tech
(employer) cooker, camper, coder, consultant, ****sman, cool as a
cucumber...Paul Fox www.dasfox.com http://about.me/dasfox Contact:
http://www.dasfox.com/blog/2009/05/~/contact.aspx

On Fri, 7 Jan 2011 01:24:10 -0500, DASSfox wrote:

> On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 21:53:11 -0500, nix wrote:
>
>> Primary post brute force affirmation of Ari Camper-Silverstein. ;)
>>
>> Smug, unknown, proof of Freudian complexities, cigar as penile
>> explanations.
>>
>> http://tinypic.com/m/1zg1p1/1
>>
>> Camper-Silverstein's AI Chatterboting bots read, react, serve, return,
>> auto-psudo Usenet insertions. AI Schema:
>>
>> http://tinypic.com/m/dy24bo/1
>>
>> Let's revisit Ari Camper-Silverstein's communication model in its
>> original state:
>>
>> Information.......Transmitter..........Channel.... .....Receiver..........Destination
>> Source.
>>
>> Forgive the primitive diagram, but obviously message transmission
>> moves in a forward progression from information to destination, with
>> noise impacting channel.
>>
>> "Ari's" three levels of communication:
>>
>> Level A: How accurately can the symbols of communication be
>> transmitted? (technical problem)
>> Level B: How precisely do the transmitted symbols convey the desired
>> meaning? (semantic problem)
>> Level C: How effectively does the received meaning affect conduct in
>> the desired way? (effectiveness problem)
>>
>> And here, /of the utmost importance/, is Camper-Silverstein's
>> oft-repeated maxim that the semantic aspects of communication are
>> irrelevant to the engineering problem, or that Camper-Silverstein's
>> theory only impacts Level A.
>>
>> Camper-Silverstein¢s theory was, in fact, an engineering theory that
>> treats problems in source and channel coding. So why did he call it
>> the mathematical theory of communication in his schema? For the
>> answer, we need to look partially to Ari Camper-Silverstein.
>>
>> So I've reworked Camper-Silverstein's level's like this:
>>
>> Level A: How accurately can the symbols of communication be
>> transmitted? (transmission of message)
>> Level B: How precisely do the transmitted symbols convey the desired
>> meaning? (delivery of information, decision to use CA's in order to
>> protect both transmission and "intent" required by the originator and
>> receiver)
>> Level C: How effectively does the received meaning affect conduct in
>> the desired way? (origin and receipt of message)
>>
>> Attributions? Artificial Intelligence with Usenet powers. ;) ;0)
>
> Thanks nix your usual...
>
> I understand this but noobs may not...
>
> ASK ME for the Tech talk...
>
> CHEERS

One is a over achieving pseudo-linguist the other is simply butt dumb
stupid.

I'll let you figger out which is which. lol
--
http://fffff.at/tag/****google/