On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 Quentin Anciaux <[email protected]> wrote: I'll try again... fooling myself again in believing you're honest here >
Oh dear, I feared that "bye" in your last post didn't mean much. > > > So let's pretend our "AI" is in fact a Nintendo Entertainment System > game... that game, can be run on a physical NES, or can be run in an > emulator running on a physical computer... or on an emulator running on an > emulator running on a physical computer... > That's OK provided one of 2 things is true: 1) The sequence of simulations of simulations of simulations eventually terminates with a physical computer. 2) The sequence is infinite and never terminates; in which case mathematics really would be more fundamental than physics. > > From the POV of the game, it is unable to distinguish those cases > Agreed. > > Same thing with the AI, the information it has access to, it cannot tell > the ontological status of what that information represent... those > informations could come from a really real ontological physical world... or > an emulation of the really real ontological physical world or an emulation > of an emulation of the really real ontological physical world.... it has > no way to decide the ontological status of that "external world". > Agreed. 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.
