[Aleader-dev] Re: dissertation feedback

[Joshua N Pritikin]

On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 01:57:13PM -0500, William L. Jarrold wrote:
> > + 1.3 Methodological Issues -- Isn't this obvious?  I mean, the
> > problem with psychology is that people can't figure out _how_
> > to achieve procedual adequacy.  Surely researchers recognize the
> > importance and benefit of it.  Or am I naive?  ;-)
> 
> Sorry, my politically incorrect impression is that most psychologists
> either a) don't care about computers b) are afraid to learn them.  There
> is a HUGE sociopolitical infrastructure that has established itself
> and there are plenty of people to hire you, give you tenure, read your
> papers even tho procedural adequacy is hardly mentioned.  It does hit
> some people's anti-positivist and reductionist button I suppose.  But
> this is a cynical reason and there are probably many non-cynical reasons.

I don't want to dwell on this, but I guess I agree with you.
There are reasons I chose to do research well away from the
"academic" community.  ;-)

> > + I am not very happy about explaining diversity in appraisals with
> > the idea of generativity.  For Aleader, I have tried to eliminate
> > diversity in appraisal by strict adherence to repeatability.  In
> > practice, repeatability is achieved by appraising a recorded audio
> > video experience -- film.
> 
> Hmm.  You mean you watch a film and try to figure out what emotion the
> actor is experiencing?

Yes.

> Because the film doesn't change upon subsequent
> viewings, they experience the same emotion each time.

Yes, exactly.  That's how I can claim that there is a "correct
emotion" that corresponds with a given part of a film.

> > + In your conclusions, you state that "mindreading" is considered
> > a cognitive distortion, attributed to Beck (1995).  Can you briefly
> > explain what Beck is talking about?  (Otherwise I'll look it up
> > myself.)
> 
> Yes.  Imagine you and I are in a group therapy session.  You just said,
> "I am not very happy about explaining diversity in appraisals with
> the idea of generativity."...If I were paranoid, then I might say, "You
> are so mean, why do you hate me so much!"  At that point you could
> accuse me of dysfunctional mindreading.  Delineating the precise boundary
> between dysfunctional mindreading and the sort of everyday mindreading
> that is necessary for adequate social functioning seems pretty difficult.
> Counseling and clinical psychology concepts are pretty mushy.  That is
> what makes them so interesting to attempt to model.  If you can capture
> them with appropriate richness, believability, what-have-you, you can
> capture anything!  Sometimes I believe the goal is to replicate (A) the
> fuzzy-headed thinking of everyday humans.  Othertimes, I believe the goal
> is to do (B) "better" than that.  However, an AI that could do a
> half-assed job of (A) would be much more interesting than an AI that could
> do (B).  Sorry, I am starting to digress.

OK, this sounds like yet another problem that goes away if we
require repeatability and study film.

> > + What is your opinion of Knowledge Machine (KM)?
> 
> Bruce Porter and Peter Clark the main creators of it think harder
> and more principled than the creators of Cyc, I think.  Their user manual
> is a joy to read.  The most fun I have ever had reading a user manual.

As soon as my web browser starts working then I'll try to find the
main KM web site and read up on it.

> ... Internal Cyc has recently (within the last
> year) begun supporting temporal reasoning (using different predicates than
> #$holdsIn).  This is a very exciting development.

Yah but I can't benefit from that unless I get access to ResearchCyc
or a more recent OpenCyc release, correct?

> > How does it compare to OpenCyc?
> 
> The gui in Cyc is much much better.  However, if you are an
> experience computer person, you might pretty being "close to the metal" --
> command line interface and all that.  If you like Windows, then you'll
> like cyc's interface better.  If you prefer unix/linux command line
> type interfaces then the gui won't be the deciding factor.

FYI, I loath Windows.

> It is too early to decide and not important to decide now.  If you write
> 100 rules and then change your mind, you won't loose much time at all.  if
> you write 1000 rules and then change you mind, well, then you might have
> been better thinking more carefully first.

OK then I won't worry about it.  I'm not making quick progress on
writing rules so it probably won't matter for a few more months,
at least.

> Intellectual property issues also should play a role in the decision.
> OpenCyc is, if memory serves, lesser gpl (whatever that is) and I don't
> know what KM is like.

Part of OpenCyc is LGPL.  Part of it is binary only.  This funny
split license is worrisome.

> Can you tell me more about your prior background?  What kinds of coding
> have you done?  What sort of I-bank were you at?  Where do you want to go
> with this stuff?

Background ... briefly:  I grew up in California.  I started studying
computers at the age of 10.  I got admission to college a year early,
Carnegie Mellon Univ for the Computer Science / Math track.  After
2 years of college, I got bored and left without a degree.  I spent
8 years working in the financial industry in New York as a software
engineer.  During my last 3 years in New York, I wrote a "program
trading system" which was fantastically successful.  I got paid.
I saved a lot of money.  I moved to India, got married, and started
building a big house.  The house is almost done now.  Photos
are available.  ;-)

At the same time, from adolescence onward, I read everything
I could find related to eastern philosophy or artificial
intelligence.  I probably read some psychology too, but I
never found western psychology to be particularly inspiring.
It is a funny paradox that now I am trying to get more involved
in cognitive psychology.

You ask, "where do I want to go with this stuff?"  Well, wherever
it takes me.  I believe that proposing a better cognitive theory
of emotion is the most important work that needs to be done today.
I am not satisfied with the sad state of western psychology (recall
1.3 Methodological Issues), but I think I've found a way to
knock some sense into people.  I am pursuing this course full-time,
probably more than 50 hours a week.  I'd welcome help in any form.
If we can collaborate somehow then I would welcome that.  There
is far too much work to do for one people.

On the other hand, I am prepared to slowly go it alone if no one
else is interested.  I'm not going to give up until someone
convinces me that I'm wrong.

Anything else I can tell?

> Maybe a tel conv would be better?  Feel free to phone me xxx-xxx-xxxx
> after 9am or before midnight Texas (Central Standard Time).  If you have
> a resme or cv, feel free to send it.

It is relatively expensive to telephone from India to Texas.  Do you
have an instant messaging account?  Yahoo?  IRC?

-- 
Victory to the Divine Mother!!         after all,
  http://sahajayoga.org                  http://why-compete.org