I will suppose the message of Russell was for the list, and forward it (without the attachment :).

Russell, dont hesitate to tell me where are you stuck in UDA. Same question for Hal Finney.

A summary of UDA: http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/publications/SANE2004Slide.pdf
Explanation can be find in: http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/publications/SANE2004MARCHAL.htm

I recall for some new people in the list that UDA (the universal doevtailer argument) is a proof that if we are (digital) machine then physical appearances emerge from the overlapping of all possible machine dreams, where a machine dream is a computation seen from a first person point of view.


Le 27-avr.-05, à 11:40, Russell Standish a écrit :

I agree with Bruno. There have been a few times I've taken discussions
off list, only to regret it later.

Re Bruno's thesis, I don't have a problem accepting the conclusions,
just a problem understanding the reasoning. I am working on this
though - my current task is writing a book, and part of that is to
review all these ideas on the evrything-list.


On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 08:49:55AM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote:

Le 26-avr.-05, ? 21:36, John M a ?crit :

Russell wrote:
Ah John, if only I could understand what you're saying...
Sorry, Russell, I fell back into my "wholitic" lingo with several
items that
are not identical to the 'general usage'.
I wish you could point out 'some' which I should try to elaborate on.
Maybe we could do this in private exchange, to be nice to the list.

That would not be nice to the list, imo. I'm sure people on the list can trash by themselves the threads in which they are not interested. We have good training with the spam. But also, I think we can progress only by understanding misunderstandings ... In particular I intend to make somme comments on a post by John asap, and so I would prefer the thread stays online. This is Wei Dai non-moderate list, and I know "non-moderation" makes people tending to moderate themselves a little bit too much ... :) The reason I'm interested in the John/Russell debate is that I suspect Russell can swallow my methodology but not yet entirely the conclusions; and I suspect John can swallow my conclusions, but not really the methodology. So I could (selfishly) be helped in communicating my work by finding a sort of mean between Russell and John. I will elaborate later.


John M

----- Original Message -----
From: "Russell Standish" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Stathis Papaioannou" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <everything-list@eskimo.com>
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2005 10:30 PM
Subject: Re: "Free Will Theorem"


-- *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which
is of type "application/pgp-signature". Don't worry, it is not a
virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this
email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you
may safely ignore this attachment.

----------------------------------------------------------------------- -----
A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 8308 3119 (mobile)
Mathematics 0425 253119 (")
Australia http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
International prefix +612, Interstate prefix 02
----------------------------------------------------------------------- -----


Reply via email to