Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta01797918DOJ Data Set 10Correspondence

EFTA Document EFTA01797918

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 10
Reference
efta-efta01797918
Pages
0
Persons
0
Integrity
No Hash Available
Loading PDF viewer...

Summary

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
From: Joscha Bach Sent: Thursday, Apr' , 1 : To: Jeffrey Epstein Subject: Re: Attachments: signature.asc I remember how I played with neural networks as a student, and stumbled =n a solution where I could speed up the learning dramatically by =etting the network estimate how well it knew certain parts of the =roblem space, and focus its learning on that area. The next step was to =et the net decide what training data it wanted to look at. Obviously, =sking is better than observing. But for current Al systems, questions =re much, much harder, of course, at least in the general case. To ask a =uestion, I must know what I do not know, and I must know what someone =Ise knows, and how to translate and fit the answer into my knowledge. =onsequently, even people seem to find asking much harder than =nswering. (Different rules may apply to socially regulated contexts.) Children ask "true questions", in which they try to form complex models =or the first time. Once people have a model in place, they tend to only =sk for variables ("at which time does the train leave"), and when they =onverse about each others life, they tend not to be interested in model =evisions, but in mapping what they hear to existing variants of the =stablished. This seems to be even true when scientists extend their =heories: the natural inclination seems to be to find supporting =vidence to allow me to let the model stay in place, and simply adjust =t. Since a model revision would require to adjust all inferences and =onnections tied to the discarded model, this makes sense. Looking at question asking systems seems to be an extremely promising =venue for Al research. I suppose we have to treat knowledge classes =uite differently: questions about basic linguistic structure can only =e answered by other speakers. Questions about conceptual maps can only =e inferred from statements of others. Questions about content can in =rinciple be deduced from individual observations, and asking questions =to others) is simply a shortcut. The nature of question-asking seems to differ significantly between most =spergers and most neurotypicals. The former try to find out what is =rue, with the null hypothesis usually being that their own idea is =ight when it conflicts with what others tell them. Aspergers tend to =hange their opinions based on how they judge the logical truth of the =rguments of the other side. Neurotypicals tend to look for the "right" =nswer, not the true one, i.e. they try to align themselves with the =entiments and norms of people they assign social status. The primary =echanism for this seems to be "emotional synesthesia", i.e. they =iterally feel the emotions of other people as their own, including the =ense of rightfulness that accompanies a statement. Successful speakers =an project both conviction and high social status. Neurotypicals erect =ocial boundaries to a large extent to avoid "infection" with "bad" =pinions. I find that my intuitions about building Al (and about forming =nowledge, negotiating norms etc.) are largely influenced by being not =eurotypical (and that is definitely true for the most capable people in =he field). It is very visible in Marvin Minsky and Noam Chomsky, I =hink. I wonder what we are missing, especially since my intuitions and =pparent experience tell me that non-nerds rarely stumble on the right =nswers to complex problems. What do you think? —J > On Apr 26, 2016, at 08:45, jeffrey E. <[email protected]> wrote: > how are quesitons formulated by ai systems answers are easier than =ormulating good question EFTA_R1_00135387 EFTA01797918 > -- > please note > The information contained in this communication is confidential, may > be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and > is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of > JEE Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or > any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you > have received this communication in error, please notify us > immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to [email protected], > and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all > attachments. copyright -all rights reserved 2 EFTA_R1_00135388 EFTA01797919

Technical Artifacts (1)

View in Artifacts Browser

Email addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.