On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 1:48 PM, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote:
> http://arxiv.org/pdf/1405.0126v1.pdf<http://arxiv.org/pdf/1405.0126v1.pdf> > > I don't buy it. For one thing memory IS lossy and it's largely > reconstruction. > I don't buy it either but I think you could tell that the article was almost certainly worthless from the title alone because it is asking the wrong question. There is a vastly better question, *Is Intelligence Computable?* After the discovery of the Turing Machine in 1936 we had excellent reasons to suppose that the answer is yes, and subsequent inventions of programs like Watson only increases our confidence in this conclusion. Consciousness is a vastly simpler phenomenon than intelligence and that's why all encompassing consciousness theories that explain exactly how it all works are astronomically easier to find on the internet than all encompassing intelligence theories; intelligence theories are just too hard to devise and too easy to prove wrong, consciousness theories require almost no brainpower to dream up and are impossible to prove wrong. So the answer to the original question is, if Darwin was correct then consciousness must be computable because the one rock solid fact I know with absolute certainty about consciousness is that Evolution produced it at least once (and probably many billions of times) despite the fact that Evolution can't see consciousness. But Evolution can see intelligence. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
