[Fis] 回复:Re: Fis Digest, Vol 105, Issue 12 Human Wisdom vs Meta-Intelligence
Dr. Plamen L. Simeonov
plamen.l.simeonov at gmail.com
Fri Oct 27 14:58:00 CEST 2023
Sorry: here is as a last reference this link to an article to another
opinion on the subject of wisdom (in my eyes), which has to do a lot
with the concept of freedom.
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2023/10/27/genetically-modified-microbes.aspx?ui=9d7dcdfc42e94a1d188ed3355949abbf46e726a654e3e9248e97865e41e95201&sd=20200713&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art2ReadMore&cid=20231027&foDate=false&mid=DM1477502&rid=1948848407__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!WWhBAKg3_93Mu4eyPZafbvfXp3-cR9_J0jE7MV8pcgyE6PIYtyfN-d8MjVzDd5XlsUBz8Yl7YzTDr5DLqrlYeatUuIit$
On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 2:40 PM Dr. Plamen L. Simeonov <
plamen.l.simeonov at gmail.com> wrote:
> Thank you, Pedro, for this smart introduction of a new aspect.
> Particularly, I am convinced that we urgently need AI help, particularly
> in human patent and civil law with its plenty of subfields to achieve true
> justice.
> The current situation in many countries is that law courts are just stuck
> in cases and the many decision loops depend on an obsolete hierarchy and
> freedom of interpretation by smart lawyers and "lawmakers", i.e.
> parliament/congress representatives which does not often mean justice as
> the people at the basis understand it. In my view this is one of the
> reasons why modern societies degrade: the lack of operative justice.
> I know a German professor and inventor who tried to make an AI based
> patent law proof engine. But his invention got stuck in the need for
> unambiguous syntax and semantics of the law LLMs used to be given to the
> engine for binary processing. This "AI law machine" would be a great
> invention, but it would certainly make generations of lawyers and
> politicians unemployed, which I wholeheartedly welcome ;-)
>
> By the way, coming back shortly to my former essay on AI "wisdom" today: I
> think that the best way to avoid and kill tyranny these day is perhaps to
> invent and switch on to a new "own" coded language and ignore all the
> narrative bombarding us with the globalists' transhumanist propaganda. So,
> we can leave them using the conventional English as they wish. So, the more
> people move to this new "Dumbledore" invented coded language, the less
> power the unelected tyrants will have on us. What do you think?
>
> Best,
>
> Plamen
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 2:16 PM Pedro C. Marijuán <
> pedroc.marijuan at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear List, (I have just seen Plamen's; I could rephrase some of the below
>> for the sake of the argument, but it would become too long. And about the
>> server--Karl-- and also Marcus, yes something is happening, I cannot accede
>> to it either. I will check).
>>
>> Then, regarding the ongoing exchanges on Wisdom, I was reminded of the
>> TURING TEST (from wiki: if a machine can engage in a conversation with a
>> human without being detected as a machine, it has demonstrated human
>> intelligence). The test was applauded or seriously considered decades ago,
>> but now it is just a bygone obsolete item. Any domestic AI system passes
>> the test. In my case I disliked that test when I met it first time (late
>> 70s). I considered it as a symbol of the very superficial "theorizing" in
>> those new fields... so I changed gears and finally focused on "natural
>> intelligence".
>>
>> Regarding wisdom, we take it as a exclusively human quality, and
>> seemingly binary. Either yes or no. Humans have wisdom, machines don't. But
>> like in the case of intelligence, it probably is graded. For the "formal"
>> intelligence, an IQ gradation was easily established time ago, not quite
>> perfect, but it was very widely used everywhere. The, how an IQ of wisdom
>> could be established? Really difficult... it is the ages old divergence
>> between the analytical and the integrative, the reductionist versus the
>> holistic.
>>
>> My take is that around Large Language Models a pretty small but
>> noticeable enough portion of wisdom has been achieved, see for instance
>> from the below quotation. I am lightly cooperating in the AI field
>> "sentiment analysis", and have high hopes that it can contribute to an
>> improved rationalization of human social emotions, the study of which is
>> painfully in disarray ins Psycho and Sociology. No wonder the awful mental
>> state of many people in a number of societies... There is a wonderful
>> quotation from philosopher Ortega y Gasset about that (but unfortunately
>> cannot locate it).
>>
>> All the best--Pedro
>>
>> *Theory of Mind for Multi-Agent Collaboration via Large Language Models*.
>> From Huao Li et al. , at: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.10701__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!WWhBAKg3_93Mu4eyPZafbvfXp3-cR9_J0jE7MV8pcgyE6PIYtyfN-d8MjVzDd5XlsUBz8Yl7YzTDr5DLqrlYeWHs4zLd$
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.10701__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!WGQRbH1p47y_3QmXG5cnkavkcLaI6dQneyi1TygmW_kNa1lYM_Mf8gzFCzkD_vh6TMhRW5t-xmMIP2ud1gTy45FYyBUR$>
>>
>> "In this study, we assessed the ability of recent large language models
>> (LLMs) to conduct embodied interactions in a team task. Our results
>> demonstrate that LLM-based agents can handle complex multi-agent
>> collaborative tasks at a level comparable with the state-of-the-art
>> reinforcement learning algorithm. *We also observed evidence of emergent
>> collaborative behaviors and high-order Theory of Mind capabilities*
>> among LLM-based agents. These findings confirm the potential intelligence
>> of LLMs in formal reasoning, world knowledge, situation modeling and social
>> interactions. Furthermore, we discussed two systematic failures that limit
>> the performance of LLM-based agents and proposed a prompt-engineering
>> method that *mitigates these failures by incorporating an explicit
>> belief state about world knowledge* into the model input."
>>
>>
>> El 27/10/2023 a las 12:36, Eric Werner escribió:
>>
>> Dear Yixin,
>>
>> As you know from my different responses regarding Wisdom and Meta-AI
>> (Artificial Wisdom) I am of a rather split opinion:
>>
>> On the one hand, the poetic emotional side of me sees the necessary
>> inclusion of an ethics of fairness for all living creatures. I am
>> skeptical, like you, that AI can achieve this consistently. I am worried
>> about the ramifications of using AI systems in a military-governmental
>> decision making process.
>>
>> On the other hand, it may well come about that Meta-AI is possible. Such
>> a system poses questions, creates new problems that it then solves. Such
>> a Meta-AI system could rapidly explore different combinations of explicit
>> and implicit theoretical assumptions. Leading to new theories about nature
>> and the world. It could then propose new experiments that confirm or
>> disconfirm its theory or hypotheses. It could see long range relationships,
>> logical, mathematical in different specialized theories or mental
>> frameworks. Meta-AI is one of the founding cornerstones of General AI. It
>> presupposes that reasoning and not just parroting can be learned in some
>> way.
>>
>> Some more thoughts on Wisdom:
>> Human wisdom is distributed and contradictory
>>
>> - *AI models can contain all of human wisdom *- including conflicting
>> Wisdom
>> - *Conflicting Wisdom:*
>> - One societies Wisdom may be another societies doom
>> - *Realpolitik of human wisdom*
>> - As soon as limited resources, come in we get conflict
>> - *Imagine 10 people *on the land that supports 10 people if they all
>> share what they find among the other 10
>> - If they are greedy, it reduces the population
>> - It depends on if they really need 10 to find the food for 10. If
>> five are sufficient to survive on the same land with less stress, then
>> there’s a temptation to get rid of or disadvange the other five
>> - Increase and search or intelligence algorithms whether a genetic
>> or soft can lead to more resource findings
>> - Sharing knowledge leads to greater distributed, productivity and
>> more can join the community
>> - T*he life and death struggle*
>> - Imagine another group of 10 comes in to the same area that
>> supports only 10. Then we get conflict. They may cooperate but half have to
>> die because of limited resources.
>> - Same holds for university positions
>> - Same holds for a limited resources in well-to-do societies
>> versus less able societies
>> - Taking advantage of one side's ability against the other
>> - *Power Creates Laws to Perpetuate Power *
>> - Speech is regulated, prevent thought and action that may lead to
>> change of the status quo of power
>> - Servants must be servile
>> - Those in power must pretend to be generous to the extent that
>> the servant does not rebel
>> - The good master (wants to be seen as Wise, knowing what is good
>> for the underlings)
>> - The parasite must not kill its host, unless or until it can jump
>> to another host
>> - A parasite of a parasite leads to a hierarchy of parasites
>> - L*imited Resources Disturb the Ideal of Fairness and Absolute
>> Wisdom*
>> - As soon as limited resources come into play the ideal no longer
>> works
>> - The group with more power in the given environment can win the
>> resources
>> - With limited resources, there can be no compromise after a
>> certain point of sharing
>>
>> Thus my ambivalence concerning Wisdom.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Eric
>>
>>
>> On 10/25/23 2:12 PM, 钟义信 wrote:
>>
>> Dear Eric,
>>
>> There have many mysteries remained in wisdom. This is one of the reasons
>> that the concept of AI does not involve wisdom and therefore AI is able to
>> solve problem but is unable to define problem.
>>
>> Wisdom is creative in nature but AI is not. It is my belief that humans
>> can build up AI but cannot build up AW (artificial wisdom).
>>
>> Wisdom can only be owned by humans but not by any machines. Do you think
>> so? Please give comments on the point.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Yixin
>>
>> ----------
>>
>> 该邮件从移动设备发送
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------原始邮件--------------
>> 发件人："Eric Werner "<eric.werner at oarf.org> <eric.werner at oarf.org>;
>> 发送时间：2023年10月25日(星期三) 晚上7:00
>> 收件人："钟义信" <zyx at bupt.edu.cn> <zyx at bupt.edu.cn>;
>> 抄送："Joeseph Brenner "<joe.brenner at bluewin.ch> <joe.brenner at bluewin.ch>;"fis
>> "<fis at listas.unizar.es> <fis at listas.unizar.es>;
>> 主题：Re: [Fis] Fis Digest, Vol 105, Issue 12 Human Wisdom vs
>> Meta-Intelligence
>> -----------------------------------
>> Dear Yixin,
>>
>>
>> *The Relativity and Realpolitik of Human Wisdom:*
>>
>> Once we relativize Wisdom to human beings and excluded from artificial
>> intelligent systems then wisdom will vary over different human beings. A
>> grandmother may have a different kind of wisdom then a grandfather. It
>> will vary in different cultures.
>>
>> Another problem is that wisdom can be for the good of all or for the good
>> of a few if it’s restricted or if it’s malevolent.
>>
>> “Knowing how” is a kind of strategic wisdom that can be transferred from
>> one person to another or from a AI model to another AI model, robot, or
>> human.
>>
>> To set the boundary between what is beneficial for all human beings may
>> and what is not may in itself create an inherent contradiction. This is
>> especially so if there is conflict between groups of humans or animals or
>> even AI systems.
>>
>> It may be that a met-AI system may be better at differentiating in a
>> neutral way between human needs because of its inherent nonhuman
>> neutrality. This of course, has its problems as well. Indeed the very
>> creation of the AI model may be set with bias, as is seen in the conflicts
>> between leftist and rightist AI models. Determining neutrality may be
>> impossible in a social setting of diverse beliefs.
>>
>> What may be perceived as good for one group of humans may be disastrous
>> for another group of human beings. This is seen clearly in the relationship
>> between humans and animals where what is good for humans is not always good
>> for say a pig or a cow or a duck or a chicken.
>>
>> Thus even the notion of being good for all human beings maybe beset with
>> problems that are potentially insurmountable especially in the political
>> world.
>>
>> So that is the realpolitik and relativity of human wisdom.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Eric
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On Oct 25, 2023, at 12:25 PM, 钟义信 <zyx at bupt.edu.cn> <zyx at bupt.edu.cn>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Dear Joe, Eric, and colleagues,
>>
>> For the simplity of my reply I just emphase one point that is, all study
>> carried out by humans should be based on human centered stand. Otherwise,
>> humans' research leads to extinguish humans themself. That would be
>> meaningless.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> ----------
>>
>> 该邮件从移动设备发送
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------原始邮件--------------
>> 发件人："Joeseph Brenner "<joe.brenner at bluewin.ch> <joe.brenner at bluewin.ch>;
>> 发送时间：2023年10月25日(星期三) 下午5:17
>> 收件人："Eric Werner" <eric.werner at oarf.org> <eric.werner at oarf.org>;"钟义信"
>> <zyx at bupt.edu.cn> <zyx at bupt.edu.cn>;"fis" <fis at listas.unizar.es>
>> <fis at listas.unizar.es>;
>> 主题：Re: Re: [Fis] Fis Digest, Vol 105, Issue 12 Human Wisdom vs
>> Meta-Intelligence
>> -----------------------------------
>> Dear Yixin, Dear Eric,
>>
>> I very much welcome your complexification of the notion of
>> wisdom/intelligence. First of all, it eliminates the flavor of omnipotence
>> which accompanies some discourse on Artificial Intelligence.
>>
>> One now needs to define further the characteristics of Human Centered
>> Wisdom (what Yixin has been talking about all along) so that the same
>> mistakes are not made in discussing Artificial Human Centered Wisdom.
>>
>> My suggestion would be to look at the kinds of logic ("Eastern" or
>> "Western") that are most applicable to/in the two domains. Are we sure,
>> however, that all our objectives can be achieved by reference to problem
>> solving. Of course, living with unsolved problems simply carries out an
>> additional iteration or recursion step, but it might be worthwhile if this
>> were recognized explicitly.
>>
>> Eric concludes "It seems AHCW is more restrictive than AMI". I agree, but
>> suggest it should be said that AHCW is also more restrictive than HCW.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>> Joseph
>>
>> ----Original Message----
>> From : eric.werner at oarf.org
>> Date : 24/10/2023 - 10:54 (E)
>> To : zyx at bupt.edu.cn, fis at listas.unizar.es
>> Subject : Re: [Fis] Fis Digest, Vol 105, Issue 12 Human Wisdom vs
>> Meta-Intelligence
>>
>> Dear Yixin,
>>
>> Just had some clarifying thoughts while taking a shower (embodied
>> intelligence 😉)
>>
>> You state: "In the context of technical study, wisdom means the ability
>> to define the problem, which should be good for all humans if solved, and
>> intelligence means the ability to solve the problem defined by wisdom."
>>
>> To clarify:
>>
>> 1. Let me define the ability to define the problem as
>>
>> *Meta-Intelligence MI *
>> 2. And define ability to define the problem, which should be* good
>> for all humans* if solved, as *Human-Centered-Wisdom *HCW
>>
>> 3. Define * intelligence* as the ability to solve the problem defined by
>> Meta-Intelligence or Human-Centered-Wisdom
>>
>> Under these definitions, Artificial Human Centered Wisdom AHCW will be a
>> different challenge than Artificial Meta Intelligence AMI
>>
>> Given the right technology AMI may well be achievable and may give
>> different answers than Artificial Human Centered Wisdom, if the latter is
>> even achievable.
>>
>> I think this clarifies the differences in understanding of wisdom and the
>> capacity to intelligently solve the problems posed by the different types
>> of Wisdom. It seems AHCW is more restritive than AMI.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Eric
>> On 10/24/23 9:26 AM, Eric Werner wrote:
>>
>> Dear Yixin,
>>
>> I am getting a better understanding of what you mean by wisdom. Thank you
>> for your patience!
>>
>> This morning I had some thoughts described below.
>>
>> You state: "In the context of technical study, wisdom means the ability
>> to define the problem, which should be good for all humans if solved, and
>> intelligence means the ability to solve the problem defined by wisdom."
>>
>> In mathematics and other sciences, there is the difference between
>> proving theorems and discovering a theorem. Many bright mathematicians make
>> their name by proving theorems. Others like Gödel in his proof of the
>> incompleteness theorem (inherent limits of the axiomatic method) linked
>> together very different concepts-methods (Cantor's diagonal method and
>> arithmetization) to come up with a wonderful result. Proving is
>> commonplace compared to coming up with a concept.
>>
>> Missing from the parrot-like LLMs is true reasoning and questioning.
>>
>> However, I am not convinced that an artificial intelligent-rational
>> system would not be able to formulate its own questions, create new
>> concepts and new method of solving its own conundrums.
>>
>> Here are the other earlier thoughts of this morning:
>> Can wisdom be learned?
>>
>> - Artificial wisdom AW
>> - Social wisdom SW
>> - Artificial Social Wisdom ASW
>> - Embodied AI, Embodied AW
>> - Artificial Ethics AE
>> - Human wisdom HW as generated by experience
>> - Rare
>> - There but for the grace of God go I
>> - We often cannot understand someone until are in their shoes-
>> experience their situation
>> - Examples: Growing old, living in a different country or culture
>> or region, learning or knowing a different subject, being in a war zone
>> - You have to know two or more subjects to interrelate them
>> - Artificial rationality AR
>> - Understanding requires
>> - Information
>> - State
>> - Intention-Strategic
>> - Value - Emotional Info
>> - Operators
>> - Transform information
>> - This gives the dynamics to rational thought
>> - Ability or capacities
>> - Intelligence
>> - Circular?? Rational inference
>> - Questioning and reasoning in self dialogue
>> - Can intelligence be learned?
>> - Seems to require basic competencies-capacities
>> - Reasoning
>> - Social
>> - Emotional
>> - Wisdom (circular)
>> - How organized is the brain?
>> - Inherent competencies
>> - Modular capacities of the brain
>> - Linguistic, visual, auditory, semantic, pragmatic, motor
>> - Wisdom Requires
>> - Experience
>> - Capacities
>> - Reasoning
>> - Dynamic
>> - Self reflection
>>
>>
>> Hope this clarifies my thoughts somewhat.
>>
>> In summary, I am inclined to view the possibility of Artificial Wisdom AW
>> as a very real possibility. It is an open question whether the
>> Parrot-Like-LLMs will ever achieve AW, but a hybrid might.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Eric
>> On 10/24/23 3:58 AM, 钟义信 wrote:
>>
>> Dear Eric,
>>
>> I am also very worried about the military uses of AI. This is an issue on
>> technical ethics and needs the strong cooperation between all governments.
>>
>> We, as scientists and professors, have the responsibility to promote the
>> study of technical ethics in AI. At the same time, we have to pay more
>> attentions to the technical study of AI itself.
>>
>> I agree with you on the characters of wisdom: fairness, kindness, love,
>> for all humans, for all life, and, all in all, for living and developments
>> of all people.
>>
>> In the context of technical study, wisdom means the ability to define the
>> problem, which should be good for all humans if solved, and intelligence
>> means the ability to solve the problem defined by wisdom.
>>
>> Keeping the difference between wisdom and intelligence mentioned above,
>> it is believed that intelligence can be simulated by machine whereas wisdom
>> cannot be simulated by machine. In other word, *AI cannot be creative in
>> the meaning of unable to define the problem good for all humans in solved*.
>> I wonder if you agree or not.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>>
>> Prof. Yixin ZHONG
>> AI School, BUPT
>> Beijing 100876, China
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------ Original ------------------
>> *From: * "Eric Werner" <eric.werner at oarf.org>;
>> *Date: * Mon, Oct 23, 2023 05:33 PM
>> *To: * "钟义信" <zyx at bupt.edu.cn>; "fis" <fis at listas.unizar.es>;
>> *Subject: * Re: [Fis]回复： Fis Digest, Vol 105, Issue 12
>>
>>
>> Dear Yixin, Ma
>>
>> Thank you all for your thoughtful contributions Krassimir, Marcus,
>> Pedro, Yixin. Thinking about wisdom and human nature and AI. Recently
>> viewing the uses of AI in weapons systems already being designed and
>> produced by corporations that sell to governments, made me hesitate about
>> what we are doing. We need a deep discussion about artificial intelligence
>> in a social industrial governmental military context.
>> AI in love and war
>> *We walk lightly along the edge of a deep ravine, *
>> *where can be seen *
>> *the results of passions played. *
>> *Oh, I loved too much, *
>> *and by such, by such *
>> *is happiness thrown away.*
>> *I had wooed not as I should*
>> *a creature made of clay*
>> *When the angel woos the clay *
>>
>> *he'd lose his wings *
>> *at the dawning of the day*
>>
>> (Adapted from a poem 'On Raglan Road' by Patrick Kavanagh)
>>
>> - Wisdom in the wide human sense
>> - Fairness
>> - Kindness
>> - Love
>> - For all humans
>> - For all life
>> - Military uses of AI
>> - Goal directed
>> - Antagonistic
>> - Cooperative
>> - Destructive
>> - Murderous
>> - Anti-human
>> - Financially motivated
>> - An AI model is like a child
>> - It can be molded to the wishes of the user
>> - At the same time, it’s like a mother that responds to every wish
>> - It is an all knowing God
>> - Connected to a robotic system, it can heal, but it can also
>> murder
>> - AI is a child of humankind
>> - All too human
>> - A savior and genocidal
>> - What will we do?
>>
>> King regards,
>>
>> Eric
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> On 10/22/23 9:43 AM, zyx at bupt.edu.cn wrote:
>>
>> Dear Eric,
>>
>> You proposed a number of points which are interesting and important
>> Thank you very much!
>>
>> I would like to discuss at least some of them not now, but a few days
>> later because my notebook was trouble some the day before yesterday.
>>
>> Best wished,
>>
>> Yixin
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 发自我的手机
>>
>>
>> -------- 原始邮件 --------
>> 发件人： Eric Werner <eric.werner at oarf.org>
>> 日期： 2023年10月19日周四 傍晚5:56
>> 收件人： 钟义信 <zyx at bupt.edu.cn>, fis <fis at listas.unizar.es>
>> 主 题： Re: [Fis] Fis Digest, Vol 105, Issue 12
>>
>> Dear Yixin,
>>
>> Can you be more specific what you mean by "change the paradigm used in
>> AI". It might help to give a specific example.
>>
>> *At present AI systems certainly behave as if they are goal directed.
>>
>> *AI systems appear to have wisdom in that they can propose wise courses
>> of action
>>
>> * What do you mean by "pure formalism"? It seems one of the powers of
>> formalism is to understand AI and human intelligence.
>>
>> * It seems AI systems exhibit human-like wisdom when they offer advice or
>> guide the actions of a virtual assistant or self driving car. The react
>> based on the circumstances and goals of the other, at leas to an extent.
>>
>> * Why can't a machine understand human goals and purposes if it gains a
>> model of those from human data?
>>
>> * Why can't an AI system have intentions?
>>
>> My overall problem is understanding your specific criticism of the
>> present AI paradigm? This notion seems to me to need clearer definition.
>>
>> How would you overcome the present AI paradigm and what specifically is
>> different when you want to "change the paradigm used in AI"???
>>
>> This is not a criticism it is a real question in trying to understand
>> you. At present I just don't see the difference between the present AI
>> paradigm and your new AI paradigm.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Eric
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/19/23 8:48 AM, 钟义信 wrote:
>>
>> Dear Krassimir, Dear Eric, and Dear Colleagues,
>>
>> The discussion is going on well thanks to all your efforts.
>>
>> Here is a few points I would like to mention (or re-mention).
>>
>> (1) The purpose of the "declaration on Paradigm Change in AI" is to make
>> an appeal for *change the paradigm used in AI.*
>>
>> (2) There may have different understanding on the concept of paradigm.
>> However, *the concept of paradigm for a scientific discipline has been
>> re-defined as the scientific world view and the associated methodology* because
>> the scientific worldview and its methodology as a whole is the only factor
>> that can determine whether a scientific discipline needs a "revolution"
>> (Kuhn's language).
>>
>> (3) The major result of "paradigm change in AI" is *to change the
>> methodology used in AI, including the principles of "pure formalism" and
>> "divide and conquer"*. This is because of the fact that *the former
>> principle leads to the ignoring the meaning and value and thus leads to the
>> loss of understanding ability and explaining ability* while *the latter
>> one leads to the loss of the general theory for AI*. Note that "no
>> explaining ability" and "no general theory" are the most typical and also
>> most concerned problems for current AI.
>>
>> (4) There is *difference between human intelligence and human wisdom*.
>> One of the functions of human wisdom is to find the to-be-solved problem
>> which must be meaningful for human purpose of improving the living and
>> developing. Yet, the function of human intelligence is to solve the problem
>> defined by human wisdom.
>>
>> (5) Human intelligence can be simulated by machine. But human wisdom
>> cannot be simulated by machine because machine is non-living beings that
>> has no its own purpose and cannot understand human purpose. No purpose
>> means no wisdom.
>>
>> I wonder if you agree or not. Comments are welcome!
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>>
>>
>> Prof. Yixin ZHONG
>> AI School, BUPT
>> Beijing 100876, China
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------ Original ------------------
>> *From: * "Krassimir Markov" <itheaiss at gmail.com>;
>> *Date: * Thu, Oct 19, 2023 03:32 AM
>> *To: * "fis" <fis at listas.unizar.es>;
>> *Subject: * Re: [Fis] Fis Digest, Vol 105, Issue 12
>>
>> Dear Yixin, Eric and FIS colleagues,
>> Let me present some thoughts about
>>
>> *The “Intelligence” Paradigm*
>>
>> For those who are not familiar with the concepts of "paradigm" and
>> "paradigm shift", I would recommend texts from Wikipedia that explain it
>> clearly enough.
>>
>> I myself maintain a neutral position in the dispute between Popper and
>> Kuhn regarding the development of science. Both theses have their grounds,
>> but at different levels and stages. In fact, in this case, the law of
>> quantitative accumulation, which leads to qualitative changes, applies.
>> Obviously, in a number of cases the paradigm shift happens in leaps and
>> bounds, while in others it happens smoothly and barely perceptibly.
>>
>> For example, the accumulation of sufficient observations and evidences
>> regarding the shape of the earth required a shift to a new paradigm: from
>> the "Earth is flat" paradigm to the "Earth is not flat" paradigm.
>>
>> Sometimes opposing paradigms can coexist, not negating each other, but
>> complementing each other. For example, this is the case with Euclid's fifth
>> postulate (the parallel postulate).
>>
>> The postulate has long been considered self-evident or inevitable, but no
>> evidence has been found. Eventually, it was discovered that reversing the
>> postulate gave valid, albeit different, geometries. A geometry where the
>> parallelism postulate does not hold is known as non-Euclidean geometry.
>>
>> With regard to the paradigm of "intelligence" we have a similar
>> situation. We have at least two opposing paradigms based on two opposing
>> postulates.
>>
>> The first, let's call it the "flat intelligence postulate", was well
>> articulated by Yixin in his post:
>>
>> "Intelligence is the ability to solve problems, but not the ability to
>> detect and define problems, the latter of which is one of the faculties of
>> wisdom."
>>
>> The second, let's call it the "non-flat intelligence postulate", will
>> sound unifying: "Intelligence is both the ability to solve problems and the
>> ability to detect and define problems" (Eric), but in different directions
>> in the hierarchy of intelligences (KM)". This is how we arrive at the idea
>> of cybernetic systems, where there is a controller and a controlled, but
>> the controller is connected to the environment from which it receives
>> controlling influences and is, in practice, both "controller" and
>> "controlled", but in different aspects of the system.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> To be continued ...
>>
>>
>> На ср, 18.10.2023 г. в 15:07 ч. <fis-request at listas.unizar.es> написа:
>>
>> Send Fis mailing list submissions to
>> fis at listas.unizar.es
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> fis-request at listas.unizar.es
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> fis-owner at listas.unizar.es
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of Fis digest..."
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>> 1. Re: Paradigm AI - I guess we call it Genius (Eric Werner)
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Eric Werner <eric.werner at oarf.org>
>> To: Karl Javorszky <karl.javorszky at gmail.com>
>> Cc: "钟义信" <zyx at bupt.edu.cn>, fis <fis at listas.unizar.es>
>> Bcc:
>> Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2023 14:07:13 +0200
>> Subject: Re: [Fis] Paradigm AI - I guess we call it Genius
>>
>> Dear Karl,
>>
>> Thank you for bringing this important point to my attention. Here are
>> some thoughts:
>> I guess we call it Genius
>>
>> - Difference between generating and understanding or reading
>> - Super intelligence, requires genius or generational understanding
>> - Generative intelligence
>> - Creative intelligence
>> - Compositional intelligence
>> - Formative intelligence
>> - Evolutional intelligence
>> - Restricting, intelligence to problem-solving, dismisses, creative
>> acts of composition in science and the arts
>> - Think of Heinz Kohut’s formation of the self in psychology versus
>> Freudian reactive psychology
>> - It’s the difference between discovering a theorem, and proving the
>> theorem
>> - It’s the difference between school-boy problem-solving, and Newton
>> - Some psychologists think of intelligence in relationship to testing
>> people for their ability to cope in educational institutions. They want to
>> see if they are college material or not.
>> - With future All systems were talking about Newton level
>> intelligence not college level intelligence
>> - Kantian synthetic intelligence
>> - We better be ready for that! If not, we got some real problems.
>> - That is why making these systems social and cooperative is so
>> essential.
>>
>> We may quickly reach a point where the compositional creative
>> intelligence of artificial models is so powerful, we will not be able to
>> understand them. Not just how they work. We already don't understand how
>> they work now. But their reasoning and new outputs such, as for example,
>> mathematical insights. Imagine a system that can reason and develop 2,000
>> years of mathematics in a few minutes. It is precisely this overarching
>> linking of knowledge that makes for real intelligence such as that of
>> Leibniz or Newton. The old school model of psychological testing of
>> intelligence uses a definition of intelligence that is to limiting for AI
>> models. AI models are not your evey day student.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Eric
>> On 10/18/23 12:59 PM, Karl Javorszky wrote:
>>
>> Dear Eric,
>>
>>
>>
>> Your statement: „The essence of general intelligence is the ability to
>> not only solve an externally given problem but to be creative and find and
>> define problems.” is at deviance to accepted delineations of concepts in
>> the trade of psychology. Rohracher [1] has defined in 1969 (and to my
>> knowledge, no one has disputed this wording): “Intelligence is the degree
>> of efficiency [of the CNS] while solving new problems.”
>>
>> What you refer to is subsumed variously under: creativity, alertness,
>> curiosity, vitality, spontaneity.
>>
>> There is consensus in the epistemology of psychology that there can exist
>> no final, conclusive, all-encompassing theory of personality (in which
>> intelligence and adaptability/curiosity would or would not be separated as
>> concepts), because if such an ultimate, final, true theory of personality
>> would exist, that assumption would negate the axiomatic rule that one can
>> always learn something new, at least about himself. There is, by
>> definition, no end to introspection and philosophy. One can always come up
>> with a new theory of personality and one cannot rule out that a new theory
>> of personality would be more reasonable, truer, more conclusive than
>> anything that has existed before.
>>
>> Psychologists see theories about mind and soul in the same way believers
>> see their God. It is impossible to recognize all features of God, let alone
>> to insist that one has a correct reading.
>>
>> So, if you decide not to distinguish between efficiency of solving new
>> problems and ability and tendency towards finding new problems to solve,
>> you are free to do so. Established use of words splits the two personality
>> traits.
>>
>> I have prepared a statement about the key word “otherwise”. The word is
>> needed to scale the efficiency of mental processes while solving new
>> problems (aka ‘intelligence’) by scaling the diversity/similarity
>> properties of alternatives. To be able to efficiently choose between
>> alternatives, one needs to have alternatives that are different among each
>> other. The task is to find such collections of symbols that are
>> alternatives to each other, not by machinations by humans, but as members
>> of a symbols collection. This task is not easy to solve while using the
>> symbols set in the traditional, Sumerian ways only. One needs to assume
>> that symbols have their own properties, by their nature, immanent to them.
>>
>> Due to the two-messages-per-week rule, the contribution shall come next
>> week.
>>
>> Karl
>>
>> [1] Rohracher, H.: Einführung in die Psychologie, Urban & Schwarzenberg,
>> Wien 1951
>>
>> Am Mi., 18. Okt. 2023 um 12:01 Uhr schrieb Eric Werner
>> <eric.werner at oarf.org>:
>>
>> Dear Yixin,
>>
>> Thank you for you comments!
>>
>> To your point (2): The essence of general intelligence is the ability to
>> not only solve an externally given problem, but to be creative and find and
>> define problems. For example, given a knowledge of mathematics and physics
>> and data to generate new mathematics and new insights into the nature of
>> the world.
>>
>> To your point (3): Biotechnology and AI are somewhat independent fields.
>> AI can help genome research and decoding genomes. But once genomes are
>> decoded that information can be used to construct more general AI models.
>> When I say "architecture" I meant the architecture of the human brain
>> encoded in the human genome. This architectural information can be used to
>> guide the structuring of AI models be be more potent and more human like.
>> And, AI may well help in the process of structuring its future version.
>> That is what I meant by selfreferencing.
>>
>> To the more general point, formalization of social information can help
>> guide the improvement of AI models to be more social and have greater
>> abilities in a AI-robot social setting.
>>
>> All the best,
>>
>> Eric
>> On 10/18/23 9:16 AM, 钟义信 wrote:
>>
>> Dear Eric,
>>
>> Thank you for the interesting talk on "Paradigm AI" from which I learned
>> a lot.
>>
>> As a discussant, may I propose some of my understanding. Comments are
>> welcome.
>>
>> (1) I appreciate your idea that saying "Physics paradigm PPD does not fit
>> well with AI paradigm" and "Information paradigm PID is a better fit". This
>> is the valuable common basis, between you and me, concerning the PPD, PID
>> and AI.
>>
>> (2) How to define the concept of intelligence? This is a very difficult
>> problem. To my own understanding, the following short statement may serve
>> as one of the candidates: *Intelligence is the ability to solve problem
>> but not the ability to find and define problem, the latter of which is one
>> of the abilities for wisdom.*
>>
>> (3) The paradigm for AI can be used as the paradigm for bio-technology
>> with certain simplification and specialization. This judgement is not based
>> on their "structure/architecture", but based on their "information
>> function" - which is the basic function in both AI and biotechnology, that
>> is to seek opportunity for "living (or solving problem)" and to avoid the
>> "danger (or failing to problem solving)".
>>
>> Once again, comments and criticisms are most welcome.
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>>
>> Prof. Yixin ZHONG
>> AI School, BUPT
>> Beijing 100876, China
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------ Original ------------------
>> *From: * "Eric Werner" <eric.werner at oarf.org>;
>> *Date: * Tue, Oct 17, 2023 02:32 AM
>> *To: * "fis" <fis at listas.unizar.es>;
>> *Subject: * [Fis] Paradigm AI
>>
>>
>> Here are some brief thoughts on Paradigms and AI by I presume was written
>> by Yixin Zhong since I cannot read Chinese.
>> Paradigm AI
>>
>> - I agree that the physics paradigm PPD doesn’t fit well with the AI
>> paradigm, and that the information paradigm PID is a better fit
>> - Artificial intelligence systems, don’t necessarily learn from human
>> beings. In unsupervised learning they learn from data and not from humans.
>> - The problem, and becomes really how to define what intelligence is:
>> Which of the following is it?
>> - Rational inference
>> - Summarizing large amounts of text and data
>> - Making new predictions based on scientific theories and
>> available data
>> - Developing new theories that explain the data in the more
>> succinct way, and making new predictions
>> - Developing new technologies independently of human input
>> - Planning and executing the actions and intentions of a robot
>> - Having social intelligence
>> - Being cooperative with a human being in achieving a task
>> - Interrelating two discipline, such as physics and mathematics,
>> to make new discoveries
>> - Understanding, genomes in the way that human beings cannot
>> - Designing new organisms by designing their genomes
>> - I agree with the language of a new paradigm, such as artificial
>> intelligence will develop slowly step by step in conjunction with its use
>> -both conceptually and experimentally .
>> - In a new paradigm entire new language is created as a paradigm is
>> developed
>> - The language evolves in concert with a new ontology suggested by
>> the paradigm
>> - It is an ontology of objects, technologies, actions, and
>> strategies
>> - What will be particularly interesting, is the *linking of the
>> paradigm of artificial intelligence with the paradigm of biotechnology*
>> - Biotechnology and AI will truly link the human brain with the
>> artificial brain
>> - The genome of the natural brain will be reflected in the
>> architecture of the artificial brain
>> - Hence by using AI to decode the genome of the natural brain, it
>> will be self-reflected in the design of the developing artificial brain
>> - This will bring unprecedented social and rational functionality
>> to the artificial brain
>> - Note that the biotech-genome paradigm also is founded on the
>> information paradigm.
>>
>> Thank you Yixin Zhong for your input and emphasizing the intimate
>> relationship of information and AI paradigms.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Eric
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> * Dr. Eric Werner Oxford Advanced Research Foundation https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://oarf.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!WWhBAKg3_93Mu4eyPZafbvfXp3-cR9_J0jE7MV8pcgyE6PIYtyfN-d8MjVzDd5XlsUBz8Yl7YzTDr5DLqrlYefHtmJWg$
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://oarf.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!TIIx5Wtklq6f08o-lkfpzmVltSrC8Oy2oMP7tcMZsYwSN5x_BDJBF1vtN9DOTbE6BXCYP2mXThgkBtz8Hin4ZKg$>
>> *
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Fis mailing listFis at listas.unizar.eshttp://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>> ----------
>> INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONAL
>>
>> Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada por la Universidad de Zaragoza.
>> Puede encontrar toda la información sobre como tratamos sus datos en el siguiente enlace: https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas
>> Recuerde que si está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de baja desde la propia aplicación en el momento en que lo desee.http://listas.unizar.es
>> ----------
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> * Dr. Eric Werner Oxford Advanced Research Foundation https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://oarf.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!WWhBAKg3_93Mu4eyPZafbvfXp3-cR9_J0jE7MV8pcgyE6PIYtyfN-d8MjVzDd5XlsUBz8Yl7YzTDr5DLqrlYefHtmJWg$
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://oarf.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!S48dgtLY-v427YBnRO4ovcOPfYmIyRg2qFfQ_Vw-sWoIjfzS8ZWpLpRilKkBtXqBqXyrkHUwwWHOZ6wdhD823UM$>
>> *
>> _______________________________________________
>> Fis mailing list
>> Fis at listas.unizar.es
>> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>> ----------
>> INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONAL
>>
>> Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada
>> por la Universidad de Zaragoza.
>> Puede encontrar toda la información sobre como tratamos sus datos en el
>> siguiente enlace:
>> https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas
>> Recuerde que si está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de
>> baja desde la propia aplicación en el momento en que lo desee.
>> http://listas.unizar.es
>> ----------
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> * Dr. Eric Werner Oxford Advanced Research Foundation https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://oarf.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!WWhBAKg3_93Mu4eyPZafbvfXp3-cR9_J0jE7MV8pcgyE6PIYtyfN-d8MjVzDd5XlsUBz8Yl7YzTDr5DLqrlYefHtmJWg$
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://oarf.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!VvOfZm0CWjVPM7xYKVUO5vkDvx9MusQMRPpMkuycNvECTx_JKVuphYgtiPWoWJVdjig7Zmh4qyxchxc_Dlf37Ok$>
>> *
>> _______________________________________________
>> Fis mailing list
>> Fis at listas.unizar.es
>> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Fis mailing listFis at listas.unizar.eshttp://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>> ----------
>> INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONAL
>>
>> Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada por la Universidad de Zaragoza.
>> Puede encontrar toda la información sobre como tratamos sus datos en el siguiente enlace: https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas
>> Recuerde que si está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de baja desde la propia aplicación en el momento en que lo desee.http://listas.unizar.es
>> ----------
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> * Dr. Eric Werner Oxford Advanced Research Foundation https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://oarf.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!WWhBAKg3_93Mu4eyPZafbvfXp3-cR9_J0jE7MV8pcgyE6PIYtyfN-d8MjVzDd5XlsUBz8Yl7YzTDr5DLqrlYefHtmJWg$
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://oarf.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!Tp73mvJuJUMNK3m6xXu_VUCsW-Poi0CFq_XnfNau9_R6RtJ9H97j8KIdmljPVTZ5fp9ugRtDL4oKZu_gxjwG2pY$>
>> *
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> * Dr. Eric Werner Oxford Advanced Research Foundation https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://oarf.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!WWhBAKg3_93Mu4eyPZafbvfXp3-cR9_J0jE7MV8pcgyE6PIYtyfN-d8MjVzDd5XlsUBz8Yl7YzTDr5DLqrlYefHtmJWg$
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://oarf.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!ULTdPadjetHQaFjDWHSRq3NTGl5cum0ToYkM5RPNPmDlsElQtx0BarbTaNClj9Gs3pK5uLq7CNAT1ZjBQdOJxfo$>
>> *
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> * Dr. Eric Werner Oxford Advanced Research Foundation https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://oarf.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!WWhBAKg3_93Mu4eyPZafbvfXp3-cR9_J0jE7MV8pcgyE6PIYtyfN-d8MjVzDd5XlsUBz8Yl7YzTDr5DLqrlYefHtmJWg$
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://oarf.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!U6Z9SjSPXXPQE_dYNztjOD0PIXKI7DKT8_nzn-liWAXn4G_QUg1i4fvKHGFzwuH94uJe_nj6fPVMUFlws1cYm38$>
>> *
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Fis mailing listFis at listas.unizar.eshttp://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>> ----------
>> INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONAL
>>
>> Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada por la Universidad de Zaragoza.
>> Puede encontrar toda la información sobre como tratamos sus datos en el siguiente enlace: https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas
>> Recuerde que si está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de baja desde la propia aplicación en el momento en que lo desee.http://listas.unizar.es
>> ----------
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> * Dr. Eric Werner Oxford Advanced Research Foundation https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://oarf.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!WWhBAKg3_93Mu4eyPZafbvfXp3-cR9_J0jE7MV8pcgyE6PIYtyfN-d8MjVzDd5XlsUBz8Yl7YzTDr5DLqrlYefHtmJWg$
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://oarf.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!RgLnjNz9O07xrTXKPte-Q52ZaNv5bSe2q0kcXcqJTGMt5OUshd6kdTKqnSVj2xb1GscdC55j-7nvyPF4m2g9ZEw$>
>> *
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> * Dr. Eric Werner Oxford Advanced Research Foundation https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://oarf.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!WWhBAKg3_93Mu4eyPZafbvfXp3-cR9_J0jE7MV8pcgyE6PIYtyfN-d8MjVzDd5XlsUBz8Yl7YzTDr5DLqrlYefHtmJWg$
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://oarf.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!RceHxVnwcS1HKa4o1K3O2F3CWJTH4hKFZwUBkMrZcO5zelqA1w1gSqqL8f3tyAsY8lI24FG7RRGsI42DlRjSZNs$>
>> *
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Fis mailing listFis at listas.unizar.eshttp://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>> ----------
>> INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONAL
>>
>> Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada por la Universidad de Zaragoza.
>> Puede encontrar toda la información sobre como tratamos sus datos en el siguiente enlace: https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas
>> Recuerde que si está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de baja desde la propia aplicación en el momento en que lo desee.http://listas.unizar.es
>> ----------
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Fis mailing list
>> Fis at listas.unizar.es
>> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>> ----------
>> INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONAL
>>
>> Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada
>> por la Universidad de Zaragoza.
>> Puede encontrar toda la información sobre como tratamos sus datos en el
>> siguiente enlace:
>> https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas
>> Recuerde que si está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de
>> baja desde la propia aplicación en el momento en que lo desee.
>> http://listas.unizar.es
>> ----------
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20231027/9c68ebb4/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Fis
mailing list