Re: Jason + Stathis
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 12:57:07PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > Perhaps a stable Everything list FAQ would be more relevant (than an > unstable wiki). May I suggest you to take a look on Michael Clive Price > "Everett FAQ" which is very good. The articles of an everything-list > FAQ would have to discussed before on the list, I think. And if and > when we agree, then it would have to be stabilized (or have explicit > new editions, with a saving of the old versions). If not the wiki will > be just another mailing list and it will dubble our efforts, and it > will make unclear all the processing. OK? > > Bruno > Wikis can be stabilised. Or stable FAQs can be created by taking a snapshot of a Wiki and performing some editorial work. Also wikis are supposed to save the editing history - it should be possible to revert vandalism. I'm quite a fan of wikis, even though I know they're not a panacea. They can be spammed, but then so can email lists, and so far the everything-list has been remarkably robust to being infected with garbage. Hopefully, the same will be true of the wiki. One thing I do suggest is that we link offsite to generally accepted terms. I have done this with links to "Born rule", "Quantum Mechanics" and so on to Wikipedia. Plato.stanford might be a better source for philosophical terms. Anyway, I'm prepared to upload relevant definitions of concepts based on my book as a starting point. I expect corrections :) Cheers -- A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Mathematics UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Australiahttp://www.hpcoders.com.au --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Jason + Stathis
Jason doesn't currently allow file uploads. I tried to upload a copy of my book's cover art, but had to link externally instead. Up to him whether he turns this feature on or not, I guess... Cheers On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 07:56:41AM +0800, Wei Dai wrote: > > On Feb 13, 3:28 am, Brent Meeker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > You don't need an emailer that understands HTML to look at an attached > > jpeg, like the one I attach to this. :-) On the avoid-l mailing list the > > rule is to keep attachements under 500kb. Perhaps Wei Dai would like to > > adopt a similar rule. Also, I would be pleased to see pictures of you and > > others I communicate with via this list. > > I think I've asked people to place attachments on websites and link to them, > instead of posting them directly. I and probably many others are keeping our > own personal archives of this mailing list. 500kb attachments will quickly > make these archives very cumbersome to maintain. > > Jason's Wiki may be a good place to host these attachments. Wiki's ususally > have an upload function. Alternatively there are plenty of free web host > providers that can be found by doing a Google search. > > > > -- A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Mathematics UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Australiahttp://www.hpcoders.com.au --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Jason + Stathis
On Feb 13, 3:28 am, Brent Meeker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You don't need an emailer that understands HTML to look at an attached > jpeg, like the one I attach to this. :-) On the avoid-l mailing list the > rule is to keep attachements under 500kb. Perhaps Wei Dai would like to > adopt a similar rule. Also, I would be pleased to see pictures of you and > others I communicate with via this list. I think I've asked people to place attachments on websites and link to them, instead of posting them directly. I and probably many others are keeping our own personal archives of this mailing list. 500kb attachments will quickly make these archives very cumbersome to maintain. Jason's Wiki may be a good place to host these attachments. Wiki's ususally have an upload function. Alternatively there are plenty of free web host providers that can be found by doing a Google search. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: The Meaning of Life
Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > Brent Meeker writes: > > > > If we discovered some million year old civilization today I think > wonder > > at its achievements, however paltry, would far outweigh dismay at its > > wickedness, however extreme. I'm not sure what the significance > of this > > observation is. > > I don't think it's true. My exhibit A is the Aztecs. > > Brent Meeker > There is a certain impertinence in allowing oneself > to be burned for an opinion. > -- Anatole France > > > The Aztecs aren't a million years old. The further removed it is from us > (literally and metaphorically), the less we worry about the ethical > considerations. If some far future nonhuman civilization dug up the > Nazis their children might very well want the equivalent of Adolf Hitler > dolls for Christmas, even if their ethical standards turn out to be > similar to our own. In the long run, fascination trumps horror. > > Stathis Papaioannou Of course distance, in time or DNA, makes ethical judgments less relevant. It's hard for us to judge chimpanzees and impossible to judge dinosaurs. Brent --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: ASSA and Many-Worlds
Hi Hal, Le 12-févr.-07, à 03:37, Hal Ruhl a écrit : > > Hi Bruno: > > I was using some of the main components of my > model to indicate that it allows white rabbits of > all degree. Any succession of states is > allowed. If the presence of SAS in certain > successions requires a certain family of white > rabbit distributions then these distributions are present. Well, thanks for the white rabbit, but the current goal consists in explaining why we don't see them. When you say any succession of states is allowed, are you talking about computations? In computations the states are logically related, and not all succession of states can be allowed, or you talk about something else, but then what exactly? What are your assumption, and what are your conclusion? I know you have made an effort in clarity, but in your last definitions you adopt the axiomatic way of talking, but not the axiomatic way of reasoning. This makes your talk neither informally convincing (granted some sharable intuition) nor formally clear. I have always been willing to attribute to you some intuition, I continue doing so, and I have suggested to you some books capable of providing helps toward much clarity, which is what is needed to communicate to others, especially when working on extremely hard subject like what we are discussing. I hope that Jason, who kindly proposes some act of systematization, will be able to help you to develop your probably interesting ideas, Regards, Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Jason + Stathis
Le 12-févr.-07, à 03:04, Hal Ruhl a écrit : > > > Hi Jason: > > I want to thank you for you work re a centralized place to keep the > various essences of the list and their variations. It would indeed be nice if Jason succeed in helping you to put your ideas in some stable forms. I guess you recall I have made long and repeated tries years ago, but at some point your talk was to fuzzy to proceed (too much undefined jargon). Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Jason + Stathis
Le 11-févr.-07, à 20:18, Jason Resch a écrit : > > > On 2/11/07, Bruno Marchal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Jason, >> >> I am not against a wiki for the list, but I think it could lead to >> some >> difficulties. I have already asked more than one time what are >> people's >> main assumptions, without much success (only Hal Finney answered). For >> my part I am just explaining results I got and published a long time >> ago (and it is just a sort miracle which made me defends those result >> as a thesis in France in 1998). I'm a bit annoyed for this sometimes. >> Concerning the acronyms I am using (comp, UD, UDA, Movie-graph, AUDA >> G, >> G*, ...) I refer to my papers available through my URL. I could make a >> list if you want, but if you put them in a wiki, I will insist, for a >> change, that correct references are joined. > A list of terms would be very useful. As for keeping references > joined, so for instance on the article that defines the UD you would > like a references section on the bottom which links to one of your > pages or one of the posts in this discussion thread? I favor that, is > it what you meant? > The problem is that some post have disappeared. For example my conversation with hal Finney in the "KNIGHT, KNAVES and ..." thread. An old post by Schmidhuber has disappeared and has come back, etc. Change of archive management changes the adresses of the posts (just look at the evrything-list links in my web pages for an example). So if you refer to post in the archive, you will have to keep the changes in such situation. So I would recommend BOTH type of references. It is fair with some among us who have do the needed work to publish. Especially if they make their paper available on their web pages. > >> >> >> I am grateful for the kindness and patience of the people in this >> list. >> There are not many person interested in such subject, which of course >> is a difficult interdisciplinary subject, it helps me a lot. But to be >> honest, the only notion I could (but not yet have) borrowed from the >> list discussion is Bostrom Self-Sampling Assumption wording, and his >> notion of Observer Moment. Indeed (n-person-points of view of the true >> Sigma1 sentences can provide n-person points of view observer moment; >> see below) >> Schmidhuber left the list after denying any sense in the first and >> third person notion (he is not open on the mind-body problem). I don't >> remember Tegmark having participate in the list, except indirectly >> through a post of James Higgo quoting a personal conversation where >> Tegmark explains why he does not infer quantum immortality from >> quantum >> suicide. Tegmark is a bit fuzzy on what is an observer. >> if we could use a simple pen for simple drawing. Just a pen. I mostly >> reason with simple images. And this is even more true about the >> quantum >> topological target which can be seen as an intermediate step between >> mind/matter and numbers. > After a cursory look I did come across this service: > http://www.imaginationcubed.com/LaunchPage Which lets one draw an > image, and then forward it to an e-mail address. Others can then > further edit it with their own writings and color. This can be a problem with a wiki. For collective multipartite work I prefer a mailing list where (normally) you can keep track of the evolution of the work. Now a wiki on the acronyms, and on the view of the participant, could really help, but not with the risk of making life harder, by making incorrect references for example, for those who are professional (which have to justify originality for getting their bread and stuff like that etc.). Sometimes my boss is tired of seeing me explaining all my work before submitting. He insists there are some personal copyright issues I should be more serious about. Actually I disagree because I have already published my main work (albeit not always in big journal), and about what follows my phd work, well it helps me to listen to people comments, sure, but the list find it hard, I guess because it supposes a good understanding of what has been already done, so I don't worry too much (benefices are greater than the danger to be copied). Most people on this list are quite honest, but this has not always been the case. > Although I do not know how long the images are saved. You see ... Perhaps a stable Everything list FAQ would be more relevant (than an unstable wiki). May I suggest you to take a look on Michael Clive Price "Everett FAQ" which is very good. The articles of an everything-list FAQ would have to discussed before on the list, I think. And if and when we agree, then it would have to be stabilized (or have explicit new editions, with a saving of the old versions). If not the wiki will be just another mailing list and it will dubble our efforts, and it will make unclear all the processing. OK? Bruno --~--~-~--~~~---~--
Re: Jason + Stathis
Le 11-févr.-07, à 18:50, Brent Meeker a écrit : > > Bruno Marchal wrote: > ... >> Personally I believe that the mailing list would be formidably >> enhanced >> if we could use a simple pen for simple drawing. Just a pen. I mostly >> reason with simple images. And this is even more true about the >> quantum >> topological target which can be seen as an intermediate step between >> mind/matter and numbers. >> >> Bruno > > I concur, a simple graphic can be very helpful. Why not scan in a > drawing and attach it as a jpeg. I often do that in physics > discussions. Well, first Wei Dai, the list master, has explicitly ask us, sometimes ago, not to send attachment. Nevertheless, he has tolerated apparently some sending of little attachment, I have already done. But 1) those who have no mailer capable of understanding HTML did not get the message, or when they got it, it was through many clicking. 2) the drawing appears with the personal message of Google, making the text+drawing less fluid. The idea of a pen is to be able to mix text and little drawing quickly in bot writing/drawing and reading. The one who will succeed in a standard commercializing of such an emailer with JUST ONE pen (NOT a pen + a brush + color etc.) will be rich. Thanks for crediting me with the idea, I will ask only 1% of the benefice :-) Those drawings can be deformed with the condition that the deformation concerves the topology (a vague circle should remain a vague circle, not becoming a curved line with extremities). Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: The Meaning of Life
Brent Meeker writes: > > If we discovered some million year old civilization today I think wonder > > at its achievements, however paltry, would far outweigh dismay at its > > wickedness, however extreme. I'm not sure what the significance of this > > observation is. > > I don't think it's true. My exhibit A is the Aztecs. > > Brent Meeker > There is a certain impertinence in allowing oneself > to be burned for an opinion. > -- Anatole France > The Aztecs aren't a million years old. The further removed it is from us (literally and metaphorically), the less we worry about the ethical considerations. If some far future nonhuman civilization dug up the Nazis their children might very well want the equivalent of Adolf Hitler dolls for Christmas, even if their ethical standards turn out to be similar to our own. In the long run, fascination trumps horror. Stathis Papaioannou --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
