Bruno Marchal wrote:
I will take a look once I get enough time. It seems you belong to the
ASSA group, that is you accept some form of bayesianism for fundamental
probability question. Hope you will wake them up ...
(ASSA = absolute self-sampling assumption). You should read Nick
Bostrom and the posts by Hal Finney, Wei Dai and some others in the
list archive) ...
Apparently we agree on "mathematicalism" ...


Thanks for the welcome, I've been looking over the list archive and
have found your posts to be very logical and concisely described.  From
what I gather your believe in mathematicalism and computationalism.  In
the posts of yours I have seen, I have not come across anything that I
would disagree with.  My question is, do you see ASSA as incompatible
with COMP, and if so how?  One of the ideas I describe on the website I
posted is that Turing machines, being mathematical structures exist and
there should exist an instance of a turing machine for every possible
program.  Some of these programs define more states than others (before
looping or halting) and life forms should be most likely to occur
within programs that define the most states.  Is what I described
compatible with both COMP and ASSA?

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at

Reply via email to