On May 31, 1:54 am, Quentin Anciaux <allco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2012/5/31 Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com>
> > On May 30, 6:09 pm, Quentin Anciaux <allco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > You are defining a 'real computer' in terms in terms that you are
> > > > smuggling in from our real world of physics. In a Church-Turing
> > > > Matrix, why would there be any kind of arbitrary level separation? The
> > > > whole point is that there is no fundamental difference between one
> > > > Turing emulation and another. Paris is a program.
> > > A program is running on a machine... a program interact through interface
> > > and that's the **only** way to interact.
> > Huh? A program interacts with another program directly.
> Yes ? Give me an example, the most basic interface is shared memory (and
> eventually, any shared thing is done via memory access)... So give me a
> program that can talk/share thing with another program without any
> interface between them...

You brought in the term interface specifically to talk about the
necessity to intentionally bridge two separate layers of reality. To
use a computer, I need a KVM or touchscreen or whatever, an interface
that samples the behavior of physical matter and maps it to
microelectronic settings. I pointed out that in a truly digitial
universe, no such thing would be necessary and nothing would be
prevented by the lack of such a thing.

Once something is native digital, it can be integrated with anything
else that is digital native - that is sort of the point. It's all
virtual. Any formalized virtual interfaces, a KVM in Second Life or
The Matrix or whatever, are purely decorative. They are cartoon
facades. The actual code doesn't need any kind of graphic
representation or digital-to-something-to-digital transduction to pass
from one area of memory to another.

> > There is no
> > interface. It makes no difference to the OS of the HW node whether the
> > program is running virtual Paris on the root level of the physical
> > machine or virtual virtual Paris on one of the virtual machines.
> Yes there is a difference, the paris running on a virtual machine has no
> direct access (and can't know of it unless an interface exist) on the
> physical hardware.

The virtual machine has the same access to the physical hardware as
the root level. It's entirely up to the programmer how direct they
want it to appear to the user, but ultimately, it is still just a
program running on the hardware. The virtual machine cannot run
without hardware.

> > > > > If not you aren't really doing multi level simulation (simulation in
> > a
> > > > > simulation)... but a single level one where you made it look like
> > multi
> > > > > level.
> > > > > Example: if you run a virtual machine (like virtual box) and you
> > > > virtualize
> > > > > an OS and inside that one you run a virtual box that run another os
> > > > inside
> > > > > it, the second level cannot go to the first level (as the first level
> > > > can't
> > > > > reach the host) unless an interface between them exists.
> > > > No, you can. I can log into the root level on a hardware node - pick a
> > > > virtual machine on that node and log into it, open up a remote desktop
> > > > there and log back into the hardware node that the VM box is on if I
> > > > want. I can reboot the hardware machine from any nested level within
> > > > the node. There doesn't need to be an interface at all. They are all
> > > > running on the same physical hardware node.
> > > Well you can't read "unless an interface between them exists."
> > What interface are you talking about? I can make a million nested
> > layers of virtual worlds and I can make it so the same virtual fire
> > burns in all of them, with no interface required.
> Well I know you do it through magic mushroom... but hey, that doesn't work.

Sounds like you are conceding my point though.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to