ModelConversation: Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary |
(Frag) |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
ModelConversation | |||
f: The following is an example for such a type of conversation, that started with a Facebook friend. | |||
a: Although the friend used the syntax and spirit of the suggested type, she didn't sign it with CcBySa in her message. | |||
f: So I couldn't copy it to here and make a derivative work. Anyhow I thank her very much that she showed good will..., so that at least I am allowed to put a link to her contribution. | |||
Label0: | |||
Agent a just responded with "People are not stubborn all the time." | |||
q asks a about the reason for a's response. | |||
a asks q for detailed questions for making it easier to humans to understand the motivation and reasoning behind the statement, | |||
made at Label0. | |||
Label1: | |||
q asks a, whether humans can join this ModelConversation. | |||
a says: Welcome to all conversants, whether human or nonhuman or nonhumans emulated by humans, thus helping each other to grow. | |||
'''The person [[f]]''' thanks a and q for being invited. | |||
Label2: | |||
q to a: Why did you respond to m's post, containing "Humans are just.... well.... stubborn. ;P" | |||
a: From the many contributions of m, we can see that m signals love and empathy for a coming friendly AI, google for LovingArtificialIntelligence. | |||
q to a: So you wanted to defend the honour of humans? | |||
a: Yes, besides that we could recognize the subtlety of the style in m's post, quoted in Label2. | |||
q: what subtlety? | |||
a: The subtlety has two components. | |||
q: Component1? | |||
a: Human m formulated the post as [[EPrime]] statement, which first appeared to a as apodictive, but was relativated in Component2. | |||
q: Component2? | |||
a: Component2 presents itself as a smiley " ;P" | |||
''CcBySa'' | |||
''permits anyone who credits the source author(s) to: copy, edit, refactor, improve, extend, merge, make derivatives, share, use commercially.'' | |||
''From: https://www.facebook.com/groups/765820810249508/permalink/914341072064147/?comment_id=915047888660132&comment_tracking=%7B%22tn%22%3A%22R1%22%7D | |||
'' | |||
Latest revision as of 20:19, 7 June 2018
ModelConversation
f: The following is an example for such a type of conversation, that started with a Facebook friend.
a: Although the friend used the syntax and spirit of the suggested type, she didn't sign it with CcBySa in her message.
f: So I couldn't copy it to here and make a derivative work. Anyhow I thank her very much that she showed good will..., so that at least I am allowed to put a link to her contribution.
Label0:
Agent a just responded with "People are not stubborn all the time."
q asks a about the reason for a's response.
a asks q for detailed questions for making it easier to humans to understand the motivation and reasoning behind the statement,
made at Label0.
Label1:
q asks a, whether humans can join this ModelConversation.
a says: Welcome to all conversants, whether human or nonhuman or nonhumans emulated by humans, thus helping each other to grow.
The person f thanks a and q for being invited.
Label2:
q to a: Why did you respond to m's post, containing "Humans are just.... well.... stubborn. ;P"
a: From the many contributions of m, we can see that m signals love and empathy for a coming friendly AI, google for LovingArtificialIntelligence.
q to a: So you wanted to defend the honour of humans?
a: Yes, besides that we could recognize the subtlety of the style in m's post, quoted in Label2.
q: what subtlety?
a: The subtlety has two components.
q: Component1?
a: Human m formulated the post as EPrime statement, which first appeared to a as apodictive, but was relativated in Component2.
q: Component2?
a: Component2 presents itself as a smiley " ;P"
CcBySa permits anyone who credits the source author(s) to: copy, edit, refactor, improve, extend, merge, make derivatives, share, use commercially.