From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3F2D97FBC5 for ; Sat, 10 Jan 2015 20:40:00 +0100 (CET) Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of examachine@gmail.com) identity=pra; client-ip=74.125.82.176; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="examachine@gmail.com"; x-sender="examachine@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: domain of examachine@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.176 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=74.125.82.176; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="examachine@gmail.com"; x-sender="examachine@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@mail-we0-f176.google.com) identity=helo; client-ip=74.125.82.176; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="examachine@gmail.com"; x-sender="postmaster@mail-we0-f176.google.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ag8BAL9+sVRKfVKwm2dsb2JhbABbg1hNCwSDAbA/BoJ1hAKJYIFphXECgQIHQwEBAQEBEQEBAQEBBgsLCRQuhAwBAQEDARIRHQEbEQwBAwELBgULDSoCAiEBAREBBQEKEgYTCAoJB4d1AQMJCA2pfz4xiy6Ba4J3igMKGScDClSDBgEBAQEBBQEBAQEBFwEFDoV3hAqDQIFZAQFPB4JogUEFhDsGjT6EBIFEgQ8wileCJ4FwEiOBDAmEEjwxgQyBNwEBAQ X-IPAS-Result: Ag8BAL9+sVRKfVKwm2dsb2JhbABbg1hNCwSDAbA/BoJ1hAKJYIFphXECgQIHQwEBAQEBEQEBAQEBBgsLCRQuhAwBAQEDARIRHQEbEQwBAwELBgULDSoCAiEBAREBBQEKEgYTCAoJB4d1AQMJCA2pfz4xiy6Ba4J3igMKGScDClSDBgEBAQEBBQEBAQEBFwEFDoV3hAqDQIFZAQFPB4JogUEFhDsGjT6EBIFEgQ8wileCJ4FwEiOBDAmEEjwxgQyBNwEBAQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.07,737,1413237600"; d="scan'208";a="116470802" Received: from mail-we0-f176.google.com ([74.125.82.176]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 10 Jan 2015 20:39:59 +0100 Received: by mail-we0-f176.google.com with SMTP id w61so13099985wes.7 for ; Sat, 10 Jan 2015 11:39:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=BsIdjzVxI+UdbWiS61JQmhNX1lLO+O3j0EPN6ru1nlI=; b=T3kxjxt908nxPlc6lUt6Pb/XN6BvRmMDIReBW3vzstUf7rHVcwLv00iYz1FQApfUZt Rsy3SbSRWr8d3Mg02pbP3eVsa9ybtEWUaeaUllxSmXJC1jHv+rMnHsLFCeVt1szcoqpb UHQN1h3CEuhdsGSOZfVdWpbOQbptTXrT/MkEXM+RuirI7hY+4q6iQJ7xaPTLWxmimzRS 9vkfgYWUyzoKLSBrT3TsGd5iHoSdTBXIP35nt+pcW8NGu9vM8UkGIxWUArFWzZfRz8+O Fb/oh5UnNjWZojrJKGqmGrV31mRj9A/K6Z4FeS0id8gN+8xnBZsjrDJGbIQja7wZN7d1 s3cA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.103.201 with SMTP id fy9mr16618600wib.31.1420918799104; Sat, 10 Jan 2015 11:39:59 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.194.73.228 with HTTP; Sat, 10 Jan 2015 11:39:59 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <179a7ef93afed958daa2c024a5a1bb2f@whitequark.org> Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2015 21:39:59 +0200 Message-ID: From: Eray Ozkural To: Kenneth Adam Miller Cc: caml users Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=14dae9cc90b84682c5050c517024 Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Ocaml programmers interested in human-level AI --14dae9cc90b84682c5050c517024 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I think oasis is pretty good, just didn't have time to try it, thoroughly TBH. I think I was trying something and then I couldn't do it so I went back to my makefile (which was pretty easy to maintain). Cheers, On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 8:44 PM, Kenneth Adam Miller < kennethadammiller@gmail.com> wrote: > What's wrong with oasis and it's build system? I like that, it does a good > job if you take the time to learn it and put effort in your package details. > > The only thing I think the ocaml environment is missing is a static check > of the surrounding environment for the tools that will be used, for use in > opam. That way, when stuff builds, you get told all the dependencies > instead of doing iterations of finding each missing thing by hand. > > On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 1:38 PM, Eray Ozkural > wrote: > >> Dear Peter, >> >> On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 8:13 PM, Peter Zotov >> wrote: >> >>> On 2015-01-10 19:29, Eray Ozkural wrote: >>> >>>> Dear Ocaml list, >>>> >>>> I would be very pleased if the members who have a lasting interest in >>>> the subject of human-level AI would network with me. We have a startup >>>> working on that subject. Our code base is mainly in ocaml, and our >>>> team might need some extra programmers in the near future. Although >>>> this is not a formal job advertisement (yet), those who would like to >>>> get in touch may just send me a mail for meeting and briefly introduce >>>> themselves. I would very much welcome such personal networking and >>>> getting to know fellow functional programming hackers who are also >>>> interested in advancing the state-of-the-art in machine learning. >>>> >>> >>> Do you think that once implemented, such an AI would be able >>> to implement a decent build system for OCaml? >>> I think it would be a very worthwhile goal. >>> >> >> >> Haha! I am still using that OCaml Makefile that I got from somewhere. So I >> suppose that would mean it would have to be a better programmer than >> I am. We do fully intend to achieve that one day. Can an AI be as creative >> as a human? That was one of the popular objections that Turing evaluated >> in his 1950 paper. Theory suggests there is no reason why. Also, it is >> already >> conceivable as a (quite high tech) extension of automatic programming >> methods. If you can specify the programming problem logically, yes, a >> general-purpose AI system (universal problem solver kind) should be able >> to solve it. Can it do better than all programmers? Such solutions have >> not >> been yet demonstrated, but why not? AI could be better at chip design than >> we are, but also could be better at algorithm design. We just haven't >> done it >> at a very large scale yet. We're waiting for a Chicago Pile moment ;) >> >> Having said that, I do have an awesome makefile library that I once >> released >> called justmake. Let me extend that to include ocaml code and maybe we'll >> use that in-house. Thanks for reminding that to me. I should also upload >> a lot >> of nice bits and pieces to github for easy access. >> >> Best Regards, >> >> -- >> Eray Ozkural, PhD. Computer Scientist >> Founder, Gok Us Sibernetik Ar&Ge Ltd. >> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ai-philosophy >> > > -- Eray Ozkural, PhD. Computer Scientist Founder, Gok Us Sibernetik Ar&Ge Ltd. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ai-philosophy --14dae9cc90b84682c5050c517024 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I think oasis is pretty good, just didn't have time to= try it, thoroughly TBH.
I think I was trying something and then I coul= dn't do it so I went back to my
makefile (which was pretty easy to = maintain).

Cheers,

On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 8:44 PM, Kenneth Adam Miller <kennethadammiller@gmail.com> wrote:
What's wrong with oasis and it's = build system? I like that, it does a good job if you take the time to learn= it and put effort in your package details.

The only thi= ng I think the ocaml environment is missing is a static check of the surrou= nding environment for the tools that will be used, for use in opam. That wa= y, when stuff builds, you get told all the dependencies instead of doing it= erations of finding each missing thing by hand.

On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 1:38 PM, Eray Ozkural <= examachine@gmail.= com> wrote:
Dear Peter,

On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 8:13 PM, Peter Zotov <whitequark@whit= equark.org> wrote:
On 2015-01-10 19:29, Eray Ozkural wrote:
Dear Ocaml list,

I would be very pleased if the members who have a lasting interest in
the subject of human-level AI would network with me. We have a startup
working on that subject. Our code base is mainly in ocaml, and our
team might need some extra programmers in the near future. Although
this is not a formal job advertisement (yet), those who would like to
get in touch may just send me a mail for meeting and briefly introduce
themselves. I would very much welcome such personal networking and
getting to know fellow functional programming hackers who are also
interested in advancing the state-of-the-art in machine learning.

 Do you think that once implemented, such an AI would be able
to implement a decent build system for OCaml?
I think it would be a very worthwhile goal.


Haha! I am still using t= hat OCaml Makefile that I got from somewhere. So I
suppose that would me= an it would have to be a better programmer than
I am. We do fully intend= to achieve that one day. Can an AI be as creative
as a human? That was = one of the popular objections that Turing evaluated
in his 1950 paper. T= heory suggests there is no reason why. Also, it is already
conceivable as a (quite high tech) extension of automat= ic programming
methods. If you can spec= ify the programming problem logically, yes, a
general-purpose AI system= (universal problem solver kind) should be able
to solve it. Can it do = better than all programmers? Such solutions have not
been yet demonstrat= ed, but why not? AI could be better at chip design than
we are, but also= could be better at algorithm design. We just haven't done it
=
at a very large scale yet. We're waiting for= a Chicago Pile moment ;)

Having said that, I do have an awesome makefile lib= rary that I once released
called justmake. Let me extend that to include= ocaml code and maybe we'll
use that in-house. Thanks for reminding = that to me. I should also upload a lot
of nice bits and pieces to github= for easy access.

Best Regards,

--
Eray Ozkural, PhD. Computer Scientist
Founder, G= ok Us Sibernetik Ar&Ge Ltd.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ai-philoso= phy




--
Eray Ozkural, PhD. Computer Scientist
Founder, Gok = Us Sibernetik Ar&Ge Ltd.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ai-philosophy=
--14dae9cc90b84682c5050c517024--