On 01 Mar 2012, at 19:39, acw wrote:
On 3/1/2012 18:16, meekerdb wrote:
If they happen to be implementing some particular machine being in
some particular state. The problem is that the machine can be self-
modifiable (or that the environment can change it), and the machine
won't know of this and not always recognize the change. This seems
like a highly non-trivial problem to me.
But the 1p view of this is to be
conscious *of something*, which you describe as the "computation seen
from the inside". What is it about these threads through different
states that makes them an equivalence class with respect to the
"computation seen from the inside"?
Yes. That's why I think we have to extract the "equivalence class
structure" from the ability of the machine to refer to itself at the
right level. It is not constructive, from the machine's point of view,
but this does not change the correct view of the correct machine, in
the correct situation, despite no one can define that "correctness".
It is not trivial at all, but the contrary would have been astonishing.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at