[Magnus] Yes, it's only that the neural nets are inside the brain, not between brains. I don't understand the reluctance to realize the similarity.
[Arlo] This is a bit like saying the Internet is inside computers not between them. Sure there is hardware inside a computer on which the sociality rests, but a single computer is not social. [Magnus] So, what you're doing is to severely limit my possibility to refute your theory. You're making it a tautology. Not very scientific of you. [Arlo] Refutation is not a function of quantity. [Magnus] Then what about a computer? How is a computer able to support an intellectual pattern like a book, or a design specification for a new car? You can remove it from the internet, and it will support that book more or less forever. It will not decay. [Arlo] When the hardware is preserved, sure the patterns it supports can be held in stasis. I think a human brain, theoretically, can be kept in stasis for quite a while, but you are introducing now a team of people working specifically to preserve hardware. A computer, consisting of more durable inorganic patterns than brains, will last longer in a state of isolation, but this is only saying that hieroglyphs outlive organs. Okay, as we move up the hierarchy pattern duration becomes less strong. [Magnus] If you only rely on a human society to support intellectual patterns, you will simply fail sooner or later. You just haven't dug deep enough. [Arlo] Personally, I do not. I think sociality is evident is at least several other complex biological patterns. But you are confusing storage and generation here. Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
