On Sat, May 09, 2015 at 01:23:57PM +1200, LizR wrote:
> On 9 May 2015 at 11:59, Russell Standish <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 12:43:32PM +1200, LizR wrote:> Assuming a
> > recording *can* be conscious (i.e. that the MGA's conclusion
> > > isn't absurd) then of course it can be.
> > >
> >
> > But such a recording is so large (probably consuming all the matter
> > with the visible universe), how can you assert that it's consciousness
> > is absurd? That is what you need to do to make the MGA work...
> >
> > Now you're doing what Brent does - repeating something that's more or less
> what I said, prefaced by "but".
>
> I didn't assert it was absurd, I said "assuming..."
>
To be fair, I didn't imply you were asserting it either. Just that one
needed to assert it in order for the MGA to work. But I'm glad we're
"more or less" in agreement :). Now this a genuine problem of pronouns
("we" and "you" are often used to refer to the impersonal "one" in
English, which is not really a problem in French, for which "on" is
always the appropriate choice).
Cheers
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics [email protected]
University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
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.
