User talk:Vanished user 392817/Human Vs Computer

For Cpiral
Here is a list of things I wish for you to do:


 * Begin the article with a brief (One ¶) summary. do not include any wikilinks yet, I want to go over that after you are done.
 * Look into Article development to get an idea of what most articles go through.
 * Look at similar articles in the appropriate Wikiproject

Put a ✅ next to anything which requires reading when you are done reading the selection. Anything else please leave be until further notice. Do not go on, no matter how much you want to. You can edit around the wiki if you wish, but wait until I give you feedback to move on.

Marx01 Tell me about it

I brainstormed a possible intro and outline. It seemed like the thing to do. I understand that it could be mostly cut out. The more mistakes, the more I learn. I'll be looking forward to your categorizations and reasonings. Thank you so much, Marx01. Cp i r al  Cpiral  05:41, 26 September 2009 (UTC)


 * My goodness! What a large summary! No worries about that; it will be dispersed later on. Also, I should tell you that there is a rather large difference between writing an article and writing an essay. I have not told you this before, and was interested to see what you would write.


 * Thesis statements and ?'s is a big no-no. An encyclopedia article states what happens, not opinions or narrowed down facts (that's what sections are for). For example:

When do computers stop learning and start teaching?


 * This might work better as a section titled Development of Intelligence explaining the ways in which man and (theoretically) computers have/has/will/might gain intelligence.


 * All in all we will chomp on the bit shortly. As of right now here are some things to do:


 * Kill the sections and put them on a new subpage titled Cpiral/listofideas (note that is a link to the subpage not created yet). And then transclude that onto your userpage by pasting under a section on your userpage titled Human Vs Computer. Helps to keep the ideas while keeping them off the article-space.✅

Marx01 Tell me about it 18:00, 26 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Ahhh! No addressing the article itself! It cool you're new but I might as well have whacked you with a trout for that one. To help you remember that the article, in the article's case, does not exist, remember the quote "I think, therefor I am". An Article does not think, therefor it is not 'am' and does not even exist in it's own version of the world. Thank you Marx01  Tell me about it 06:46, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


 * For organization and time issues, I would like you to create a subsection every day as to what you have done to the article. This is what it Should look like:
 * What org issues, specifically? WHich time issues in particular?

28 September 2009
Today I blah blah, influencing the blah blah blah of constructing a section based on blah with a little blah sprinkled blah blah blah blah, which can be summarized in the following paragraph:

blah blah intelligence blah blah blah Star Trek. [1]
 * Blah blah blah, humanity has never blahed with such blah as to blah blah the blah of creating a

capabilities blah to eat cookies?
 * With blah blah and blah, how would blah affect the enhancement of blah by giving blah blah blah

~


 * Notes


 * The first part explains what you did (wikify, write, delete, summarize, quote) and why.
 * The second part explains what you wrote (the factual stuff), how your edits increased usability, or why things were in need of shortening.
 * The third part is something to make you think. Come up with a single question which you will have answered with your contribution. This cannot be things like: What did (insert name here) do to affect the belief of humanity's "self elimination"? (I do not expect that from you anyway) It must be very direct and answer something specifically. If you wrote things on various topics, then put a single question down on the most complete.

Happy writing!

It turns out that the writing was happier than the reporting. I tried. It did make me go back once, and work harder on what I had so far. I really tried. And after about 20 minutes, I realized that the daily report was not going to work in the format that you requested. Perhaps I rebel on this because I believe that the asking for or telling of the motivation for acts, is an unnecessary foray into the creation of reality. I believe this because I also believe that everything is the cause of everything. In other words, all possible motivations make for every single action. Why pick one? (Rhetorical). I trust you, so I tried. Unspoken trust is life's sweet purpose for life (whose mystery must remain unspoken). It turns out that you must try to trust me in my rebellion. However, as always, I am open to persuasion.

Well then I shall bribe in the ways I can. I'm already going to do your userpage (sorry it's taking so long!)... I could make you a banner... Do all the research for a single section in the article... make the report a one paragraph summary of what you are doing... give you a barnstar... try and get you an essay spot... all very possible... Marx01 Tell me about it 04:09, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I like that! "Bribe energy" is a "drama energy", which is what child-like play offers (on a world stage yet). "Reprimand" energy is an internal dubious tag.  It's like the whip of cafein molecules, only higher food; food for thought. There are a lot of kinds of energies and lots of lasts.  For example, the last reprimand is the reprimand of reprimand.


 * The report format, quickly, just as you already know: it's the thought that counts. The whole planet of persons could survive just by simply counting out the years to 2062 as a sort of meditation.  Why not just a time-stamp whose average period of arrival is 24 hr?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cpiral (talk • contribs) 01:33, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I use the history mechanism. Why not? I love hitting the "next edit" button over and over again as I go up the history for that editor or that day. It shows me exactly what was added, when, and why. (MediaWiki is amazing to me.) I will report in the edit summary box, as I have a habit of doing. Marx01 Tell me about it 02:40, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Article Feedback
As I said before (you may have just overlooked this) the article cannot address itself, as the first paragraph does several times. I bolded and marked issues:

This article compares the processing power of computers to that of the brain in memory, multi-tasking, logic, language processing, thinking, pattern recognition, creativity, and rules. The first comparison is the level at which artificial intelligence can use words in a convincing way. There is apparently, after much detection work, nothing out of the ordinary going on. This is the Turing test. (fragment) The second comparison is when a computer can program itself. A self adaptive ability is common to both computers and humans. The third comparison is when computers begin to write policy, based upon the literature and the data. There are areas where humans defer to and take orders from a machine. Then there is a section on security issues. This article will extrapolate into the future, since computers are rapidly evolving. (I would cut out this sentence)

Please work on these issues before moving on (no rush if you cannot do them immediately)

Thank you,

Marx01 Tell me about it 03:58, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Can you please explain how I could make the report section better? I also understand that you could not create a question sometimes, please skip it if you cannot. if you did minor edits, put minor. No big deal. Just makes life easier for me, and I'll repay you in the end (as I always try to do with the extra stuff) Marx01  Tell me about it


 * The report format, quickly, just as you already know, it's the thought that counts. The whole planet of persons could survive just by simply counting out the years to 2062 as a sort of meditation.  Why not just a time-stamp whose average period of arrival is 24 hr? Cp i r  al  Cpiral  01:34, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Lost edits
I lost several days worth of editing on the lead section. I have amended my editing technique essay.

Several days? Did it not save or did you not work on it? (either way's fine just curious) Also I am going to give assignment on images (on this page not your adoption page), as you have put them into the article but with out proper assignmentation (is that a word? well if it isn't it's mine now!). To get you started, here is the code for a Wikipedia article image (default on the right side):



Which creates:



Now of course you can make it go on the left;

Or center;



Please fix your images, add captions, and place them in appropriate places. Marx01 Tell me about it 01:00, 13 October 2009 (UTC)