Let the Game Begin

A working version of FMM’s design detection game is available.

Download and install the applicable version of “Processing”.

https://processing.org/download/?processing

Get the fifthmonarchyman progam code from here, and paste it into the Processing script area.

http://pastebin.com/ZqGRxcjt

Sample data here

http://pastebin.com/raw/MjV8RmvW

You need two files in the same folder as the Processing executable.

real.txt and fake.txt

The testing and such starts here

http://theskepticalzone.com/wp/working-definitions-for-the-design-detection-gametool/comment-page-11/#comment-104745

test strings

http://theskepticalzone.com/wp/working-definitions-for-the-design-detection-gametool/comment-page-11/#comment-104873

http://theskepticalzone.com/wp/working-definitions-for-the-design-detection-gametool/comment-page-11/#comment-104880

347 Replies to “Let the Game Begin”

  1. Patrick Patrick
    Ignored
    says:

    fifthmvonarchyman,

    I don’t think anyone here understands my entire argument because I have not made it explicit yet.

    For that we need to wait till the Game is done

    You’ve got that backwards. You need to make your argument explicit and your operational definitions clear before any form of testing can support or disconfirm it.

    Further, you claim to have played your game in a spreadsheet, which means that it must be done. Yet you remain strangely coy about providing a detailed example of how you would apply it to the strings that petrushka provided. One might reasonably draw the conclusion that your game does not actually exist.

  2. petrushka
    Ignored
    says:

    Actually, perception is full of tricks. Proofreading is quite difficult. I’ve seen typos in best selling books that were vetted by professional proofreaders.

    And I’ve posted things that contained multiple typos.

    There’s a whole field of psychology dealing with pattern recognition. And a whole internet arena devoted to breaking captcha scrambling.

  3. fifthmonarchyman
    Ignored
    says:

    Patrick: You’ve got that backwards. You need to make your argument explicit and your operational definitions clear before any form of testing can support or disconfirm it.

    I know what I’m testing whether you do you not.

    I can run an experiment and evaluate results even if you have no clue what Is going on.

    In fact I do a lot of that here.

    Patrick: Further, you claim to have played your game in a spreadsheet, which means that it must be done. Yet you remain strangely coy about providing a detailed example of how you would apply it to the strings that petrushka provided.

    I am not being coy

    I simply want you to actually play the game, Instead of me doing the work for you.

    Petrushka has provided everything necessary for you to explore his strings in this very thread. You could do so in very short order if you wanted to

    I’m just running an experiment to see if you are actually curious about any of this at all.

    If you are not it is not worth my time to try and explain it all to you

    peace

  4. fifthmonarchyman
    Ignored
    says:

    petrushka: Actually, perception is full of tricks. Proofreading is quite difficult. I’ve seen typos in best selling books that were vetted by professional proofreaders.

    And I’ve posted things that contained multiple typos.

    I never said it was not difficult.
    Difficult is not the same thing as impossible

    peace

  5. petrushka
    Ignored
    says:

    Since FMM to respond to questions about what constitutes real data, and whether it can be distinguished from scrambled data, I am going to assert that it can’t. We have several thousand posts on the topic, and not a single successful demonstration.

  6. petrushka
    Ignored
    says:

    I submitted my strings as an opportunity for you to demonstrate proof of concept.

  7. fifthmonarchyman
    Ignored
    says:

    petrushka: Since FMM to respond to questions about what constitutes real data, and whether it can be distinguished from scrambled data, I am going to assert that it can’t.

    Again real data is simply any string you are evaluating.

    You can asset that it can’t be distinguished from scrambled data if you want. We can test that hypothesis.

    In fact the authors of the financial paper have already tested it with some strings

    aint science cool

    peace

  8. petrushka
    Ignored
    says:

    Let me make this clear. You have not even provided the necessary procedure for playing the game. You have derided us for not playing, but no one knows what it means to play.

    You have a set of numbers. Exactly what are you supposed to do with them?

    I’m speaking basic mechanics here. Steps one, two, three.

    The description of what you are doing under the covers just confuses me. Are we looking for a difference between the original and the .8 r modified string, or what?

    How about some instructions?

  9. petrushka
    Ignored
    says:

    Of course scrambled data is different. The question is whether you can sort it into piles. I’ve given you an opportunity to demonstrate that you can.

    I can’t.

  10. fifthmonarchyman
    Ignored
    says:

    petrushka: I submitted my strings as an opportunity for you to demonstrate proof of concept.

    I know you did.
    The Financial game already demonstrates proof of concept. There is no need to do it again

    You have the ability to test your strings if you wish.
    I tested your first one and gave you my results. I can very easily distinguish your real string from a model that is close

    You said you did not have the same results.

    The point of making the game shareable is so that we compare the results of different observers in an objective way.

    It’s my hypothesis that if you did not know in advance what you were evaluating you would have similar results as me. I can’t wait to test that one

    peace

  11. fifthmonarchyman
    Ignored
    says:

    petrushka: Let me make this clear. You have not even provided the necessary procedure for playing the game. You have derided us for not playing, but no one knows what it means to play.

    have you played the financial game?

    peace

  12. Patrick Patrick
    Ignored
    says:

    fifthmonarchyman,

    I am not being coy

    I simply want you to actually play the game, Instead of me doing the work for you.

    Petrushka has provided everything necessary for you to explore his strings in this very thread. You could do so in very short order if you wanted to

    I’m just running an experiment to see if you are actually curious about any of this at all.

    If you are not it is not worth my time to try and explain it all to you

    There’s nothing to be curious about. You don’t even care enough about the results to provide detailed examples of how to play your game. There is literally no one on this thread who knows how to play it. Including you.

    Prove me wrong.

  13. Patrick Patrick
    Ignored
    says:

    fifthmonarchyman,

    have you played the financial game?

    The game described in the Financial Turing Test paper and your vague, hand waving description of something that appears not to exist are not remotely the same thing.

  14. fifthmonarchyman
    Ignored
    says:

    Patrick: There’s nothing to be curious about.

    nuff said.

    Patrick: Prove me wrong.

    Why should I bother if there is nothing to be curious about?

    peace

  15. fifthmonarchyman
    Ignored
    says:

    Patrick: The game described in the Financial Turing Test paper and your vague, hand waving description of something that appears not to exist are not remotely the same thing.

    have you played the Financial Turing Test game?

    peace

  16. petrushka
    Ignored
    says:

    Second request. Could someone please post a link to the financial game?

  17. fifthmonarchyman
    Ignored
    says:

    petrushka: Second request. Could someone please post a link to the financial game?

    http://arora.ccs.neu.edu/v4/tool/login.jsp

    peace

  18. petrushka
    Ignored
    says:

    I click to train and get a blank screen.

  19. petrushka
    Ignored
    says:

    Tried with two different browsers. Blank screen.

  20. Patrick Patrick
    Ignored
    says:

    fifthmonarchyman,

    have you played the Financial Turing Test game?

    I will, as soon as you answer the questions I’ve asked about your success criteria.

    Incidentally, that comment demonstrates that I understand the paper and the Financial Turing Test better than you do.

  21. Patrick Patrick
    Ignored
    says:

    petrushka,

    Tried with two different browsers. Blank screen.

    For me it says that Java is blocked. Damn right it is. I’m not taking the risk of enabling that.

  22. petrushka
    Ignored
    says:

    I do not have java blocked. I checked. It’s enabled.

  23. Neil Rickert
    Ignored
    says:

    fifthmonarchyman: bingo. When I say that a function is noncomputable in this context all we mean is that there is no finite algorithmic process to accomplish it.

    peace

    But this is a mistake. The most you can say is that there is no known algorithm that would do it in a way that you find satisfactory.

  24. Neil Rickert
    Ignored
    says:

    fifthmonarchyman: can you tell the difference between the following phrases?

    Methinks it is like a weasel
    and
    Methinks it is like a easel

    They differ by one letter.

    Do you think that the second phrase has the same meaning as the first?

    Strictly speaking, phrases do not have meanings. We have meanings.

    Okay, I’m being pedantic. But the point is that algorithms deal with formal properties, such as the differences in which letters are used (“they differ by one letter”). Algorithms do not deal with semantic issues (unless it is formal semantics).

  25. fifthmonarchyman
    Ignored
    says:

    Neil Rickert: But this is a mistake. The most you can say is that there is no known algorithm that would do it in a way that you find satisfactory.

    did you read the paper?

    peace

  26. newton
    Ignored
    says:

    fifthmonarchyman: I know what I’m testing whether you do you not.

    I can run an experiment and evaluate results even if you have no clue what Is going on.

    In fact I do a lot of that here

    I kind of figured that was a likely motivation however whether your confidence you know what you are testing and that your evaluations are justified is the unanswered question.

  27. newton
    Ignored
    says:

    fifthmonarchyman: did you read the paper?

    peace

    Did you read this? Sounds like Maguire agrees with Neil.

    “It means that you would not be able to achieve the same results in finite time, using finite memory, using a physical machine,” says Maguire. “It doesn’t necessarily mean that there is some magic going on in the brain that involves some forces that can’t be explained physically. It is just so complex that it’s beyond our abilities to reverse it and decompose

    Neuroscientist Anil Seth at the University of Sussex, UK, applauds the team for exploring consciousness mathematically. But he is not convinced that brains do not lose information.“Brains are open systems with a continual turnover of physical and informational components,” he says. “Not many neuroscientists would claim that conscious contents require lossless memory.”

    Maguire acknowledges that their proof would not hold up if information integration in the brain is reversible. “Maybe, if you had a very clever algorithm, you could still break down peoples’ memories and edit them.””

  28. petrushka
    Ignored
    says:

    Tried the financial game on a third computer and got plugin not supported.

  29. fifthmonarchyman
    Ignored
    says:

    newton: “It doesn’t necessarily mean that there is some magic going on in the brain that involves some forces that can’t be explained physically.

    I agree noncomputable does not mean magic. It just means noncomputable

    newton: Maguire acknowledges that their proof would not hold up if information integration in the brain is reversible.

    Correct. If integration is reversible then it can be reversed.

    newton: “Maybe, if you had a very clever algorithm, you could still break down peoples’ memories and edit them.””

    Suppose we created an replica of newton exactly the same as you in every way except he was a African nun, Would he still be newton?

    peace

  30. fifthmonarchyman
    Ignored
    says:

    petrushka: Tried the financial game on a third computer and got plugin not supported.

    FYI.
    I haven’t played the financial game for months.
    I’m getting a java error as well now.

    Please work at it for a bit try some different settings and if you still can’t get in I will try to step you through my version of game from scratch.

    It will be immensely better for everyone if we can start with the original game instead of my crudely coded copy.

    If we must start with my game it might make sense to wait till it’s shareable so we call all do it together just one time

    peace

  31. Patrick Patrick
    Ignored
    says:

    fifthmvonarchyman,

    If we must start with my game it might make sense to wait till it’s shareable so we call all do it together just one time

    You keep ignoring the fact that you claimed to have played your game in a spreadsheet. That means that it is possible for you to take the strings provided by petrushka and provide step-by-step, detailed examples of how to play it, complete with screenshots.

    The fact that you haven’t despite repeated requests speaks volumes.

  32. petrushka
    Ignored
    says:

    I’ve been in the coding business a while, and I never saw a program get tired and die.

    I’m betting the financial game has been taken down for repairs.

    Possibly because an actual mathematician took a look at it.

    Just a thought.

  33. fifthmonarchyman
    Ignored
    says:

    Patrick: You keep ignoring the fact that you claimed to have played your game in a spreadsheet.

    The game is contained in the files in the OP of this very thread, If you were actually curious you could have played it for your self long ago.

    Patrick: That means that it is possible for you to take the strings provided by petrushka and provide step-by-step, detailed examples of how to play it, complete with screenshots.

    Sure I could do that but I don’t much see the point in doing so for you, You have already conceded that you aren’t at all curious about any of this.

    petrushka on the other hand seems to have a little bit of curiosity but is having difficulty grasping the concept for some reason.

    I will try to give him a hand as needed

    peace

  34. fifthmonarchyman
    Ignored
    says:

    petrushka: I’m betting the financial game has been taken down for repairs.

    Possibly because an actual mathematician took a look at it.

    The paper is now several years old. The testing is done and the results have been presented, From the perspective of the authors the game serves no current purpose except to provide context for the paper.

    I think that what has happened is that it is not compatible with the newer versions of Java.

    Did you get my game to run? What does is look like?

    Do you see running line graphs that are replaced by a black screen after a few seconds?

    peace

  35. Patrick Patrick
    Ignored
    says:

    fifthmvonarchyman,

    That means that it is possible for you to take the strings provided by petrushka and provide step-by-step, detailed examples of how to play it, complete with screenshots.

    Sure I could do that

    I don’t believe you. You have not demonstrated any ability to do so.

    but I don’t much see the point in doing so for you, You have already conceded that you aren’t at all curious about any of this.

    petrushka on the other hand seems to have a little bit of curiosity but is having difficulty grasping the concept for some reason.

    I will try to give him a hand as needed

    Or you could just take the strings he provided and give a step-by-step detailed demonstration.

    Unless, of course, you can’t.

  36. fifthmonarchyman
    Ignored
    says:

    Patrick: I don’t believe you. You have not demonstrated any ability to do so.

    I really don’t care if you believe me or not. You have admitted that you aren’t even curios about any of this. Apparently you are just posting here to stir the pot. I simply don’t have any desire to participate in such foolishness

    You have repeatedly claimed that you could quickly put together something that can do better than humans on the Financial game and now we find out that you haven’t even played it to know what you are up against

    No offense but you have totally forfeited any grounds to make any demands whatsoever in this enterprise,

    On the other hand petrushka despite being a critic seems willing to have a look so I will be happy to give him a hand.

    You might take a cue from him

    peace

  37. Patrick Patrick
    Ignored
    says:

    fifthmonarchyman,

    Let me put this in words small enough for even a creationist to understand:

    Put up or shut up.

  38. fifthmonarchyman
    Ignored
    says:

    Patrick: Or you could just take the strings he provided and give a step-by-step detailed demonstration.

    demonstration of what?

    the game simply allows you to view strings in tandem and gives you feedback to let you know if you chose correctly. There is nothing dark or mysterious or difficult

    it’s a simple little gizmo for comparing strings,

    peace

  39. fifthmonarchyman
    Ignored
    says:

    Patrick: Put up or shut up.

    put up what?

    peace

  40. petrushka
    Ignored
    says:

    fifthmonarchyman: Did you get my game to run? What does is look like?

    Do you see running line graphs that are replaced by a black screen after a few seconds?

    May I ask why you ask these questions if you don’t read the answers?

    How could I have posted a screen shot image of your game if I didn’t play it?

  41. petrushka
    Ignored
    says:

    fifthmonarchyman: it’s a simple little gizmo for comparing strings,

    Exactly what is it comparing? How about some instructions?

    Let me clarify. Are we supposed to supply two different strings, or does your program create the comparison string? I am confused by the discussion of how your program works. It sounds as if you are taking an original string and manipulating it. Perhaps manipulating both.

  42. fifthmonarchyman
    Ignored
    says:

    hey petrushka,

    The instructions for playing the game are beyond simple

    1) Press the space bar to reset
    2) Quickly look at the two strings and choose the one you think is the real one
    3) run your mouse over the corresponding box if it turns green you were correct
    (you only have a few seconds to do this before the entire screen goes black)
    4) repeat steps 1-3 until you are right 100% of the time

    Hint: try looking for various patterns until you hit on the right one

    Does that help?

    peace

  43. fifthmonarchyman
    Ignored
    says:

    petrushka: Let me clarify. Are we supposed to supply two different strings, or does your program create the comparison string?

    You supply the strings.
    The program is just a platform for comparison

    Peace

    PS do you see the “W” pattern in the bottom string?

  44. fifthmonarchyman
    Ignored
    says:

    petrushka: It sounds as if you are taking an original string and manipulating it. Perhaps manipulating both.

    before we discuss how the strings are created. I want to make sure you understand how the game works

    peace

  45. fifthmonarchyman
    Ignored
    says:

    petrushka: May I ask why you ask these questions if you don’t read the answers?

    How could I have posted a screen shot image of your game if I didn’t play it?

    You implied that the real string was always on the top.

    This is simply not the case. It made me think that you have not actually tried the game but just downloaded it. You also said you could not see any difference in the strings.

    I’m just trying to get a handle on the difficulties you are apparently having

    peace

  46. newton
    Ignored
    says:

    fifthmonarchyman: newton:

    I agree noncomputable does not mean magic. It just means noncomputable

    In the case of the paper uncomputable means the assumption of uncomputability and lossless memory. This assumption seems at odds with experimental observations. ” Not many neuroscientists would claim that conscious contents require lossless memory.”

    Correct. If integration is reversible then it can be reversed.

    Yep and the mathematics would be disproved

    newton: “Maybe, if you had a very clever algorithm, you could still break down peoples’ memories and edit them.””

    Suppose we created an replica of newton exactly the same as you in every way except he was a African nun, Would he still be newton?

    So if you call something is uncomputable it remains uncomputable no matter if it is or not?

  47. petrushka
    Ignored
    says:

    fifthmonarchyman: You implied that the real string was always on the top.

    Since you have neglected to provide any instructions for the use of the program, there is no way to play it as you intend.

    The downloaded program always opens two files, real and fake. Real is always on top.

    In the absence of instructions, how is a person supposed to play the game?

  48. petrushka
    Ignored
    says:

    fifthmonarchyman: before we discuss how the strings are created. I want to make sure you understand how the game works

    That would be nice. I created a thread to ask you how to play it.

  49. newton
    Ignored
    says:

    fifthmonarchyman: Hint: try looking for various patterns until you hit on the right one

    How do define ” right one” ? In other words what makes it right and the other ,not right?

  50. Patrick Patrick
    Ignored
    says:

    fifthmonarchyman,

    My response is in Noyau.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.