On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 Craig Weinberg <[email protected]> wrote: > My entire point is that comp suggests that our visual qualia is not an > electronic light detector
The visual cortex in your brain is not a light detector and the image compression program connected to the camera on your cellphone is not a light detector either, electronic or otherwise. > Go into Photoshop or Paint. File > New > OK. This image (or it's inverse) > is what comp predicts for visual qualia of conditions where we cannot see. > There is no reason to represent anything else, and there is no noise > whatsoever in this image. > Photoshop can paint a smooth image therefore computers can never be intelligent or conscious. Of course, I see the light at last, its all so obvious now that you point out that vital fact! Why oh why didn't I see it before?! > This kind of ad hominem stuff means Zero to me. Why? I don't know, maybe because your used to people saying "this is stupid". > I know that you don't understand what I'm talking about. True, and the reason for that is you don't understand what you're talking about, thus there is little chance I would know what you mean when you obviously do not. > I on the other hand know exactly what you are talking about The fact that I do know what I'm talking about explains this asymmetry. John K Clark John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. 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.
