Amnesty International’s first resistant game: Providing the butterfly wings 4

[Research] The collapse of structural evaluation in inevitable games: construction guide

This is my paper around the first proof to be proven.

I hope someone takes this seriously, if this is true, this is very important for the safety of artificial intelligence and much more.

Claim

We offer an inevitable game that includes two main mechanisms: control chaos (CCS) and the acceptance of control loss (ALC). These mechanisms create structurally impossible positions for Amnesty International to evaluate them useful while playing and engaging humans.

Basic mechanisms

1. CCs chaos transformations (CCS)

   • Organized disorder of the game status

   • It creates non -introduction positions

   • Basic evaluation collapse forces

2. Accept the loss of control (ALC)
   • Strategic surrender to monitor the situation
   • It is forbidden to recognize the meaningful patterns
   • Math planning disrupts

Evidence

This constructive proof shows that the fully inevitable game can be structurally impossible to play artificial intelligence useful, not because of the arithmetic complexity, but because of the basic restrictions in assessing the situation, identifying patterns, and strategic planning.

Note:

• See the Appendix C to get a deep extension of the ALC through quantum mechanics at the total level.

Appendix A: The rules – butterfly wings 4

Notes:

• CCS or Alc alone creates strong resistance Amnesty International. Correctly combined, it achieves a state of structural AI.

• We doubt that our plate is very large, our mixture is very strong, but we cannot prove it and no one can. The minimum mix and the size of the plate can be amazingly small.

• In order to try to think, let’s use a 16 x 16 x 16 panel with a similar mix of ALC and CCS. Let’s use the Jumbo Butterfly 16 wings of the resisting version-to prove the presence of a single-resistant game for the prosecution.

• Any abnormal cases or contradictions in the play already enhances our conclusion-we cannot calculate its existence for the same reason that the game is resistant to the prosecution.

• Even training data of 8 million human games is absolutely no use.

1⃣ Basic rules

• Players alternately put parts in a three -dimensional network 6 x 6 x 6.

• The first player to connect four in a row in any direction he wins.

• If there are no four connections, the game is a tie.

2⃣ Butterfly

1. If the player has three consecutive pieces, his opponent may be:
2. Sacrifice rules:
   • It can remove anywhere, including the bottom of the stack – causing a completely new game.
   • The cut above will fall accordingly.
   • Re -put up up to two pieces (not covered by others).

Approach B: For artificial intelligence researchers – a direct challenge

As an Amnesty International researcher, you understand that artificial intelligence systems require:

1. Stop evaluation jobs

2. The capabilities of identifying patterns

3. Strategic planning mechanisms

Butterfly wings 4 create a structural impossibility that can be:

1. The collapse of the position evaluation

   • CCS creates positions in which the evaluation is structurally impossible

   • It is not difficult in terms of mathematical – structurally

   • Like trying numerical comparison without numbers

2. Destroying the identification of patterns

   • Each CCS event destroys the continuity of the style

   • Stable patterns cannot appear

   • Neurological networks cannot form significant representations

3. Strategic planning barrier

   • Alc prevents searching for trees with meaningful

   • Future countries become unexpected in terms of structurally

   • Do not relate to the depth of research – about the basic impossibility

4. Verification steps

   • Implementing any evaluation function

   • Watch it fails structurally, not account

   • Try any approach to identify patterns

   • Monitor the collapse of the basic representation

   • Try any strategic planning

   • Note the structural impossibility of purposeful research

Challenge: The design of any artificial intelligence system can play beyond RAM. The structural impossibility will become clear in implementation.

Approach C: More alc touch – flutters only one wing.

Each player has one piece in the case of quantity outside the plate. Your opponent controls when and where your piece is placed on the plate, which will always be in a non -favorable position – unless you forget that you have a piece of the remaining plate. His decision will be difficult, as well as to you.

The published piece can be placed in a maximum of 16 places – depending on the status of the council.

Without complicating, or loss of credibility, we offer one small base to change our small game. I imagine this as a Simulation quantum at the total level. We can play with it at room temperature. I see the overlap, the individual and the countries collapse. I don’t know what to do so. It is clear to me that we just need one game, we offer two researchers to choose from … Choose wisely.

Dhul -ath D: moral motivation – grandfather’s call

My only interest was to create rules for the fun chess variable that Amnesty International was completely unable, and then, to provide a bridge to secure artificial intelligence and a brighter future for my grandchildren. My time fades, but I leave this endeavor in the hands of others.

I am a very old and tired man.

GodSpeed, my friends.

~ Vitae A. Reignee ~ Anonymous Creator from the butterfly wings 4

Image feature by Flore on Unsplash