> On 24 Sep 2018, at 00:20, John Clark <[email protected]> wrote: > > Bruno Marcha wrote: > > >>Bruno, that's my definition but think long and hard before you agree with > >>it because if you still agree with it in your next post I give you fair > >>warning my next question to you will be "How many cities will the Helsinki > >>man see?”. > > > Only one, from its first person view. > > So you demand that the first person view of the Moscow man tomorrow predict > today
No. I ask this, since day one, to the H-guy; before he pushes the button. > what will happen to him despite the fact that today the first person view of > the Moscow man tomorrow DOES NOT EXIST! There is one property that every good > oracle needs, and that is the property of existence, and the first person > Moscow man of tomorrow doesn't have it in Helsinki today. > > I did warn you that you needed to think long and hard. You are the only one who does not grasp this. But as you show above, you don’t even read the posts. > > > We need to ask the H-guy reconstitute in each city[...] > > Nobody can ask the H-guy anything unless yesterday before any of this started > everybody agreed on exactly what "the H-guy" means, I have provided a clear > unambiguous definition of that term but you have not. I cannot parse the sentence. > > > and indeed, they both see one city, > > Asking "How many cities do you see?" would be a dumb question to ask. What > you should ask is "Given our predetermined agreement about what the term > means made before anybody was copied how many cities do you think the H-guy > ended up seeing?”. That is simply not the question asked. You eliminate the first person experience. If the H-guy is promise coffee at both place, he can predict clearly that after pushing the button he will get some coffee. P(coffee) = 1. And he can predict as well that in the two places accessibles, he will drink that coffee feeling to be localised in only once city, so, similarly, P(“I will feel to be in one city”) = 1. You put complexity ware there are none, and you dismiss the 1p notion, or the fact that the question is about the 1p experience, not about some person is from a 3p point of view. Bruno > Depending on what the agreement was the correct answer could be zero or two > or there was no agreement and thus there was no answer because there was no > question, there was only gibberish. > > 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] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list > <https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout > <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
