On 28 Jan 2005 Hal Finney wrote:
Here's how I look at the question of whether a bit string, if accidentally
implemented as part of another program, would be conscious.
.
.
.
I would approach this from the Schmidhuber perspective that all programs
exist and run, in a Platonic sense, and this
I recently posted that I seemed to have two theories re how my multiverse
might work. These are:
1) Nothing - Something = to completion.
2) {Nothing#(n) + All[(n-1) = evolving Somethings]} -
{Nothing#(n+1) + All[n = evolving
Somethings]} : repeat...
Here:
- is a
On 28 Jan 2005 Hal Finney wrote:
I suggest that the answer is that accidental instantiations only
contribute an infinitesimal amount, compared to the contributions of
universes like ours.
Stathis Papaioannou replied:
I don't understand this conclusion. A lengthy piece of code (whether it
I meant to define the symbol = as:
= is a path over kernels where each new step is inconsistent with prior
steps.
Hal Ruhl
Dear Hal,
What your defining seems to me to be a NOT map or else it is a mere
random map. There is no consistent definition of an inconsistent map
otherwise, IMHO. Please explain how I am wrong. ;-)
Why not a map that is a path where the information associated with each
step is
At 06:29 PM 1/29/2005, you wrote:
Dear Hal,
What your defining seems to me to be a NOT map or else it is a mere
random map. There is no consistent definition of an inconsistent map
otherwise, IMHO. Please explain how I am wrong. ;-)
I wanted to have a sequence that does not accumulate net
Dear Hal,
What do you propose as a means to explain the memory and processing
required to be sure of inconsistency as opposed to consistency? Both
options, it seems to me, require checking of some kind! All that is left is
randomness, there is no such a thing as a true test for randomness
Hi Stephen:
At 10:49 PM 1/29/2005, you wrote:
Dear Hal,
What do you propose as a means to explain the memory and processing
required to be sure of inconsistency as opposed to consistency?
It is not a logical inconsistency. What I am trying to convey is that each
step in the sequence pays no
8 matches
Mail list logo
