2010/1/19 silky michaelsli...@gmail.com:
Exactly my point! I'm trying to discover why I wouldn't be so rational
there. Would you? Do you think that knowing all there is to know about
a cat is unpractical to the point of being impossible *forever*, or do
you believe that once we do know, we
2010/1/19 Nick Prince m...@dtech.fsnet.co.uk:
Perhaps you misunderstood my reference to the use of copies. What I
meant was why they are considered as an indication of measure at the
beginning of thought experiments such as the one you discussed (tea/
coffe). Jaques Mallah uses them too
On 18 Jan 2010, at 19:40, Brent Meeker wrote:
Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 17 Jan 2010, at 09:11, Brent Meeker wrote:
Brent
The reason that there is Something rather than Nothing is that
Nothing is unstable.
-- Frank Wilczek, Nobel Laureate, phyiscs 2004
So, why is Nothing unstable?
People seem to be predisposed to accept AI programs as human(oid) if one can
judge by reactions to Hal, Colossus, Robby, Marvin etc. m.a.
- Original Message -
From: Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Monday, January 18, 2010 6:09 PM
On 19 Jan 2010, at 03:28, silky wrote:
I don't disagree with you that it would be significantly
complicated, I suppose my argument is only that, unlike with a real
cat, I - the programmer - know all there is to know about this
computer cat. I'm wondering to what degree that adds or
Dear Bruno, you picked my 'just added' small after-remark from my post and I
thought for a second that it was Brent's reply. Then your signature
explained that it was YOUR stance on life (almost) (- I search for even more
proper distinctions to that term). Maybe we should scrap the
term
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
2010/1/19 silky michaelsli...@gmail.com:
Exactly my point! I'm trying to discover why I wouldn't be so rational
there. Would you? Do you think that knowing all there is to know about
a cat is unpractical to the point of being impossible *forever*, or do
you
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
2010/1/19 Nick Prince m...@dtech.fsnet.co.uk:
Perhaps you misunderstood my reference to the use of copies. What I
meant was why they are considered as an indication of measure at the
beginning of thought experiments such as the one you discussed (tea/
coffe).
If the no clone theorem were a problem then you could not survive more
than a moment, since your brain is constantly undergoing classical
level changes.
How interesting!! I had forgotten that most people believe that
consciousness is a classical rather than quantum process (Penrose
On Jan 19, 6:43 pm, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote:
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
2010/1/19 Nick Prince m...@dtech.fsnet.co.uk:
Perhaps you misunderstood my reference to the use of copies. What I
meant was why they are considered as an indication of measure at the
beginning
Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 19 Jan 2010, at 03:28, silky wrote:
I don't disagree with you that it would be significantly complicated,
I suppose my argument is only that, unlike with a real cat, I - the
programmer - know all there is to know about this computer cat. I'm
wondering to what degree
Something vs Nothing?
I played with this so a decade+ ago and found that by simply realizing the
term *NOTHING* we achieved *'something*' so the *nothing* is gone. While,
however, going from *'something'* to the (elusive?) 'nothing', we have to
cut out *EVERYTHING* that may interfere with
Nick Prince wrote:
On Jan 19, 6:43 pm, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote:
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
2010/1/19 Nick Prince m...@dtech.fsnet.co.uk:
Perhaps you misunderstood my reference to the use of copies. What I
meant was why they are considered as an indication of
Are you saying that you do not subscribe to differentiation?
Nick Prince
I'm not sure what you mean by differentiation, but I don't subscribe
to one theory or another - I just consider them. Above I was only
pointing out that there are theories (in fact the most common theory) in
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 8:43 PM, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.comwrote:
2010/1/19 silky michaelsli...@gmail.com:
Exactly my point! I'm trying to discover why I wouldn't be so rational
there. Would you? Do you think that knowing all there is to know about
a cat is unpractical to the
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 2:50 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 19 Jan 2010, at 03:28, silky wrote:
I don't disagree with you that it would be significantly complicated, I
suppose my argument is only that, unlike with a real cat, I - the programmer
- know all there is to know
16 matches
Mail list logo
