From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Jason Resch
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2014 8:08 AM
To: Everything List
Subject: Re: anyone super-geek here?
I work at a company who's primary business is making large-scale private cloud
storage
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 10:24 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 04:19:01PM -0400, Jesse Mazer wrote:
> >
> > The MWI advocate David Deutsch had a quote about choices and morality in
> > the article at
> >
> http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg17122994.400-taming-the-multivers
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of meekerdb
On 4/29/2014 1:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
If my consciousness can survive a physical digital substitution, then it
survives an arithmetical digital substitution, and what we call th
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 04:19:01PM -0400, Jesse Mazer wrote:
>
> The MWI advocate David Deutsch had a quote about choices and morality in
> the article at
> http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg17122994.400-taming-the-multiverse.htmlwhich
> made sense to me:
>
> "By making good choices, doing th
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 3:02 PM, John Mikes wrote:
> *Brent(?) wrote*:
> No I never read that, but hell yeah, MWI worries me! Doesn't it worry you?
> I mean I know at one level that in a very real sense it doesn't matter
> whether it's true or not, since the other universes can never affect me,
>
On 4/29/2014 1:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
If my consciousness can survive a physical digital substitution, then it survives an
arithmetical digital substitution, and what we call the moon has to be recovered as a
stable pattern emerging from an infinity of computations in arithmetic, and cann
On 4/29/2014 12:02 PM, John Mikes wrote:
*/Brent(?) wrote/*:
Nope. Wasn't me, I wrote:
/
//Chris Fuchs is the main proponent of quantum Bayesianism, which also takes the
wave-function to just be a summary of one's knowledge of the system - and so there is
nothing surprising about it "collaps
On 4/29/2014 9:11 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Matter (primitive matter) becomes then a conceptual gap object whose only role would be
to escape the consequence of comp. That is worst than (genuine) mysticism, that's
pseudo-science or pseudo-religion.
Uh-oh! Now you've defined a heresy, Bruno.
B
On 4/29/2014 3:00 AM, Samiya Illias wrote:
An interesting conversation:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/feeling-our-emotions/?page=1
Bruno, can this be developed in a machine?
Samiya
*MIND*: Do you believe that we will someday be able to create artificial consciousness
and feelings?
*Brent(?) wrote*:
No I never read that, but hell yeah, MWI worries me! Doesn't it worry you?
I mean I know at one level that in a very real sense it doesn't matter
whether it's true or not, since the other universes can never affect me,
but at another the reality that everything happens to me that
On 4/29/2014 1:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 27 Apr 2014, at 19:38, meekerdb wrote:
On 4/27/2014 1:34 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
I think the same. That's close to Platonism. There is more than what we see, measure,
etc.
Then we can theorize, which means making assumptions (like "the moon exist
On Tuesday, April 29, 2014 12:22:23 PM UTC+1, telmo_menezes wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 12:00 PM, Samiya Illias
>
> > wrote:
>
>> An interesting conversation:
>> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/feeling-our-emotions/?page=1
>> Bruno, can this be developed in a machine?
>
On 29 Apr 2014, at 12:14, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
It is not possible to define the concept of existence without
resorting in some kind of belief.
You are right.
For example, you have to believe that 4 + 3 = 7 to believe that it
exists a number x such that 4 + x = 7.
That is why ta
On Tuesday, April 29, 2014 5:45:15 PM UTC+1, ghi...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
> On Tuesday, April 29, 2014 11:56:06 AM UTC+1, telmo_menezes wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 2:48 AM, meekerdb wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/28/2014 3:32 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 28, 20
On Tuesday, April 29, 2014 11:56:06 AM UTC+1, telmo_menezes wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 2:48 AM, meekerdb
> > wrote:
>
>> On 4/28/2014 3:32 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 10:48 PM, > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Sunday, April 27, 2014 10:12:34 AM UTC+1, te
On 29 Apr 2014, at 00:32, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 10:48 PM, wrote:
telmo, would it be ok to clarify the relation t matter you don't see
for consciousness? Do you mean you don't see as true he hypothesis
that matter is conscious ? Or you don't see that the physical
I work at a company who's primary business is making large-scale private
cloud storage systems, supporting both Amazon's S3 and OpenStack
interfaces. While OpenStack has the advantage of being more open, Amazon's
S3 protocol seems to have a larger mind share, and more traction as far as
becoming a
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 12:00 PM, Samiya Illias wrote:
> An interesting conversation:
> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/feeling-our-emotions/?page=1
> Bruno, can this be developed in a machine?
> Samiya
>
> *MIND*: Do you believe that we will someday be able to create artificial
> consci
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 2:48 AM, meekerdb wrote:
> On 4/28/2014 3:32 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 10:48 PM, wrote:
>
>>
>> On Sunday, April 27, 2014 10:12:34 AM UTC+1, telmo_menezes wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 10:43 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
It is not possible to define the concept of existence without resorting in
some kind of belief. That is why talking seriously about existence is
carefully avoided.
2014-04-29 10:18 GMT+02:00 Bruno Marchal :
>
> On 27 Apr 2014, at 19:38, meekerdb wrote:
>
> On 4/27/2014 1:34 AM, Bruno Marchal wr
An interesting conversation:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/feeling-our-emotions/?page=1
Bruno, can this be developed in a machine?
Samiya
*MIND*: Do you believe that we will someday be able to create artificial
consciousness and feelings?
*Damasio*: An organism can possess feelings on
On 27 Apr 2014, at 19:38, meekerdb wrote:
On 4/27/2014 1:34 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
I think the same. That's close to Platonism. There is more than
what we see, measure, etc.
Then we can theorize, which means making assumptions (like "the
moon exist"), and experimentation, like "going on t
22 matches
Mail list logo
