Re: [s-b] Oracle report

["Roger Hicks" <pidgepot@xxxxxxxxx>]

Priest BobTHJ determines the following:

> Consultation 5
> Supplicant: Comex
> > If all Game Objects other than the Rules and the Player
>  > named Wonko were destroyed, would it
>  > be possible for me (the Supplicant of this Consultation)
>  > to become a Player?
> Unbeliever: Wonko
>

I rule FALSE, as in no. Rule 1-4 indicates:

 "An External Force may become a Player by posting a message to a
Public Forum containing a request to become a Player and a uniquely
identifying name that e wishes to be known by. E may do this if and
only if e fulfills the following requirements:

    * E is capable of passing a Turing Test
    * E is not currently a Player
    * E has a working e-mail address "

I believe Comex has demonstrated eir ability to meet all the
requirements to become a player, if indeed e wasn't currently a
player. However, bulleted point #2 above would prevent Comex from
becoming a player for a second time, unless e first forfeited or
otherwise lost eir player status.

NOTE: I've browsed back through the archives prior to when I became a
player, but it appears several of the messages pertaining to this
consultation are unavailable. Therefore, I am unsure of the
circumstances that led to this consultation.

> -o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-
>
> Consultation 7
> Supplicant: Optional
> > A forum is invalid if it does not allow players to communicate.
> > True or
> > false?
> Unbeliever: Comex
> Reasoning:
> [1-9] "A Forum is any External Force that allows Outsiders to
> communicate.

I rule TRUE. Communication is a very general term, and (even limited
to the internet) may encompass a wide variety of possible activities.
Therefore, I think it would be difficult to find an external force
that would not allow some form of communication. However, were such an
External Force to be found, it would not be valid as a forum.

> -o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-
>
> Consultation 10
>
> Supplicant: Antonio
> > If all Game Objects other than the Player named Wonko were
> > destroyed, would it be possible for me (the Supplicant of this
> > Consultation) to become a Player?
> Unbeliever: Wonko
>

Again, I rule FALSE, using the same reasoning as my ruling for Consultation #5.

> -o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-
>
> Consultation 11
>
> Supplicant: Comex
> > True or false: Is Primo Corporation a player?
>

With respect & apologies to Priest Wonko, I judge TRUE. Primo
Corporation satisfied all the requirements for becoming a player per
this Priest's "mystical interpretation of the rules":
* Primo is an External Force. It's existance is not tied to B Nomic.
It existed prior to it's joining B Nomic.
* It posted a message to the public forum requesting to become a
player, and designated the name it wished to be known by.
* It was not already a Player.
* It has a working e-mail address, the address of it's Corporate Forum.
* It is capable of passing a Turning Test, see below.

This Priest determines that the phrase "is capable of passing a turing
test", while perhaps was added to the rules with the intention of
limiting play to human persons, actually does not limit the ability
almost any External Force to become a Player for the following
reasons:

The phrase is un-specific about which Turing Test the External Force
must be capable of passing. As Priest Wonko pointed out in
Consultation 12, there is an infinite variety of possible Turing Tests
that could be devised. A Turing Test simply compares a human to a
non-human to determine if an external observer can determine which is
which.

As an example, I could devise a Turing Test that uses gravity as its
basis for determination. I could push a human and a rock off a cliff,
and both would fall. An external observer who only knew if the objects
in question floated or fell would be unable to distinguish between the
rock and the human. This perhaps might be a foolish means of
administering a Turing Test, but it would be a Turing Test
nonetheless.

Secondly, the external force need only be 'capable' of passing a
Turing Test. It need not actually pass such a test. Given a suitable
test, almost any External Force would have the capability of passing
that test, even by sheer coincidence, after attempting that test an
infinite number of times. Using a text chat Turing Test between a
human and a monkey (who presses random keys on the keyboard) and given
a set of infinite attempts, there would be at least one such test
where the observer was unable to distinguish between the two.

Finally, capable of passing a Turing Test does not in any way signify
"is a human being" as Priest Wonko suggests in Consultation #12.
Indeed, the entire purpose of a Turing Test is to determine if a
non-human entity can suitably fool a human into believing it is one of
its own kind. I'm sure many in the Artificial Intelligence community
would find a determination that 'only a human can pass a Turing Test'
to be quite offensive.

</end ruling>
----------------------------------

As a Game Action, and with the utmost respect for Priest Wonko, I
submit the Claim that Priest Wonko's ruling on Consultation #12 is
inconsistent for the reasoning specified in my ruling of Consultation
#11. It is apparent that Priest Wonko is exercising judicial activism
(or would it be cardinal activism?) in redefining the specified phrase
to fit the meaning he believes it intends, instead of the meaning it
clearly states.

As a Game Action, I submit the following Consultation:
{
Question: True of false: Consultation #12 does not serve to prevent a
corporation from becoming a player because it specifies that said
corporation must pass "the Turing Test" instead of "a Turing Test"?
Unbeliever: Wonko
}

As a Game Action, I submit the following Consultation:
{
Question: True or false: A Player need not be capable of passing a
Turing Test in order to remain a player.
}

MIght as well attack this from every angle :)

BobTHJ
_______________________________________________
spoon-business mailing list
spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business