Re: A profound lack of profundity (and soon "the starting point")

[Stathis Papaioannou]

On Wed, 27 Sep 2017 at 1:48 am, John Clark  wrote:

>
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 7:33 PM, Stathis Papaioannou 
> wrote:
>
> ​> ​
>> It seems that you would want your assets distributed to the copies,
>> ideally both of them, if not both then one, randomly chosen (“it doesn’t
>> matter which one”).
>
>
> ​Yes. I want somebody tomorrow who remembers being me today because I
> prefer existence to nonexistence,  ​others may have a different preference
> and that's OK because there is no disputing matters of taste.
>
> ​> ​
>> That’s what someone would do if they expected to survive the copying
>> process.
>
>
> ​I do expect to survive the
> copying process
> ​, even better I expect I'll have a backup, although why my expectations
> should be of interest to anyone but me I don't know. ​
>

Then the question “what future experiences will I have” is not nonsensical.
If it were then I could not have the expectation of surviving, since to
survive I must have future experiences, and I could not conceive of having
future experiences if “I” loses meaning when I contemplate the
post-duplication future.

> --
Stathis Papaioannou

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Hoffman on Consciousness

[Brent Meeker]

It's a dishonest obfuscation.  Of course you are constructing a model of 
reality.  So what?  Because the model building mechanism was evolved and 
can be fooled doesn't mean it's not a model OF reality.  When he looks 
at a tomato and thinks, "That's a tomato." it's a true thought, unlike 
say, "That's a watermelon."  So before going off into Deepak Chopra 
land, Hoffman needs to explain that.


Brent

On 9/26/2017 4:49 PM, David Nyman wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYp5XuGYqqY

I've encountered Hoffman's ideas before. What he has to say may strike 
you as somewhat obvious in the context of this list, but it's quite 
well articulated and his metaphors and analogies are quite memorable. 
Towards the end he says "Perhaps reality is some vast, interacting 
network of conscious agents, simple and complex, that cause each 
other's conscious experiences. Actually this isn't as crazy an idea as 
it seems and I'm currently exploring it."


First-person plural, anyone? Sounds like he could make some 
interesting contributions here.


David


--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Hoffman on Consciousness

[David Nyman]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYp5XuGYqqY

I've encountered Hoffman's ideas before. What he has to say may strike you
as somewhat obvious in the context of this list, but it's quite well
articulated and his metaphors and analogies are quite memorable. Towards
the end he says "Perhaps reality is some vast, interacting network of
conscious agents, simple and complex, that cause each other's conscious
experiences. Actually this isn't as crazy an idea as it seems and I'm
currently exploring it."

First-person plural, anyone? Sounds like he could make some interesting
contributions here.

David

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: A profound lack of profundity (and soon "the starting point")

[John Clark]

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 7:33 PM, Stathis Papaioannou 
wrote:

​> ​
> It seems that you would want your assets distributed to the copies,
> ideally both of them, if not both then one, randomly chosen (“it doesn’t
> matter which one”).


​Yes. I want somebody tomorrow who remembers being me today because I
prefer existence to nonexistence,  ​others may have a different preference
and that's OK because there is no disputing matters of taste.

​> ​
> That’s what someone would do if they expected to survive the copying
> process.


​I do expect to survive the
copying process
​, even better I expect I'll have a backup, although why my expectations
should be of interest to anyone but me I don't know. ​

J ohn 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: A profound lack of profundity (and soon "the starting point")

[John Clark]

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 5:36 PM, Terren Suydam 
wrote:

​
>> ​>> ​
>> The expectations of what will happen will change from person to person,
>> but the reality of what actually did happen will not.
>>
>
> ​> ​
> The reality of what actually does happen is not available to anyone in the
> thought experiment,
>

​The reality of who does or does not have the memories of being the
Helsinki man yesterday Is ​
available
​ to anyone by simply asking the Moscow man and the Washington man about
things the Helsinki man knew.

​>
>>> ​>>​
>>> t​
>>> o open their eyes to a single city.
>>
>>
>> ​>> ​
>> ​If he's a fool he might indeed expect that, but I don't much care what
>> fools think. But ask yourself this, how many fools tomorrow will ​remember
>> being asked the question today? I maintain the answer is 2 fools not one.
>> Do you disagree?
>>
>
> ​> ​
> It's irrelevant.
>

​It's not irrelevant if the survival of the Helsinki man means somebody
today remembers being the Helsinki man yesterday; and I can't imagine what
else the survival of the Helsinki man could mean.  ​


​> ​
> The actual number of copies is irrelevant to the thought experiment, as
> long as it's more than one.
>

​If there is more than one then it would be very foolish to ask "what one
and only one thing will *you* see after *you* become two?". And that's why
the thought experiment ​is worthless.



> ​> ​
> before you enter the duplicator, what do you (the Helsinki you) expect to
> experience?
>

​I just don't get it! Why do you care what some jackass expects today but
don't care who will remembers being that jackass ​tomorrow?


> ​
> Consider one's experience before entering the duplicator, and the
> experience after. Follow the stream of consciousness, as if you were the
> one entering the duplicator,
>

​I don't know how to follow ​"*THE"*
 stream of consciousness
​ and don't even know what it means because there are two not one.


> ​> ​
> what happens on the other side?
>

​John Clark will be in two cities on the other side, if you don't believe
me then go to the two cities and see if there is anybody in them named John
Clark.

John K Clark






> As you agreed earlier, it's an experience of a single city.
>
> --
> 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: A profound lack of profundity (and soon "the starting point")

[Stathis Papaioannou]

On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 at 4:44 pm, John Clark  wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 7:48 AM, Stathis Papaioannou 
> wrote:
>
>
> ​> ​
>> Asking about your expectations is an attempt to show what your implicit
>> beliefs about your future are.
>>
>
> OK, If you say "What one and only one city do you expect to
> ​see​
> ​
> after you walk into the
> ​ ​
> that "you" duplicating machine?" I would remain silent because it is not
> my habit to respond to any old string of words, not even if the string of
> words are placed in a
> ​ ​
> grammatically correct order, not even if there is a question mark at the
> end of
> ​that​
> ​
> string. I can't give a answer if I don't know the question and I don't.
>
> ​> ​
>> if you are duplicated in Washington and Moscow would you like your assets
>> to be distributed 50/50 to the copies
>>
>
> ​That would depend on my personal
> idiosyncrasies
> ​ and also​
>  on how rich I was, if I was only living at the subsistence level I'd want
> all my assets to go to only one of the copies, it doesn't matter which one,
> because that way at least one of them would survive; if I were a
> billionaire I might prefer a different arrangement, and you might like
> something else entirely. Who cares? There is no disputing matters of taste.
> I thought we were interested in grand philosophical ideas and the nature
> of reality not the trivial likes and dislikes of individuals.
>

It seems that you would want your assets distributed to the copies, ideally
both of them, if not both then one, randomly chosen (“it doesn’t matter
which one”). That’s what someone would do if they expected to survive the
copying process.

> --
Stathis Papaioannou

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: A profound lack of profundity (and soon "the starting point")

[Terren Suydam]

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 4:30 PM, John Clark  wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 3:34 PM, Terren Suydam 
> wrote:
>
> ​> ​
>> So the expectation of anyone who enters a duplicator would be
>
>
> ​The expectations of what will happen will change from person to person,
> but the reality of what actually did happen will not.
>

The reality of what actually does happen is not available to anyone in the
thought experiment, beyond the inner reality of one's mind. Again, all
anyone has is what's in the contents of one's mind.


>
>> ​> t​
>> o open their eyes to a single city.
>
>
> ​If he's a fool he might indeed expect that, but I don't much care what
> fools think. But ask yourself this, how many fools tomorrow will ​remember
> being asked the question today? I maintain the answer is 2 fools not one.
> Do you disagree?
>

It's irrelevant. The question isn't about how many fools there are - the
answer to that is unavailable to the persons in the thought experiment. The
actual number of copies is irrelevant to the thought experiment, as long as
it's more than one.

The question for the moment, is, before you enter the duplicator, what do
you (the Helsinki you) expect to experience? Consider one's experience
before entering the duplicator, and the experience after. Follow the stream
of consciousness, as if you were the one entering the duplicator, what
happens on the other side? As you agreed earlier, it's an experience of a
single city.

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: A profound lack of profundity (and soon "the starting point")

[spudboy100 via Everything List]

I am less worried about conscious machines, but instead focus on intuitive 
machinery, that grabs science knowledge from wide apart fields and builds new 
inventions from these. Think more on the lines of, a rocket ship with a 
life-support interior that protects and feeds the travelers inside. Or, better 
yet, biological fuel cells on earth that power cars and trains and robots, 
improving the quality of life, for us, greatly. Also medical fixes too. 



-Original Message-
From: Bruno Marchal 
To: everything-list 
Sent: Tue, Sep 26, 2017 10:45 am
Subject: Re: A profound lack of profundity (and soon "the starting point")




On 26 Sep 2017, at 07:30, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote:


You folks  want Profundity-If this is fact, it is, Profundity itself. A 
Japanese team came up with a super-duper quantum computing architecture, that 
looks to be able to eat the Protein Folding Problem, with pepper and salt. I 
don't feel this news is too good to be true. Needs much work, development, 
bottleneck fixing, progging, but, am guessing that you wanted a Singularity? Ya 
got a Singularity.  
https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/09/japanese-researchers-work-out-theoretical-universal-quantum-computer-that-could-scale-to-millions-of-qubits.html
 




That approach is very interesting. I have no clue if it is feasible in a near 
future. It looks more feasible than most models though.


Now, that machine will be able to do a million times more stupidities than the 
human. 


And plausibly new quantum one ...


The singularity might be the discovery of the universal (Turing) machine. I 
think. We don't realize because we have the nose on it. 


Of course, in a sense, the bacteria, and later the neurons, did that well 
before us-the-human, and indeed, that's why we could do it to.


Once there, the universal machine can only become more deluded, get trapped in 
the Samsara, confuse its higher self with the little ego, and mix brilliance 
with barbary, like with atomic bombs.


Now, I would certainly applaud if they succeed in solving, by simulation I 
guess, to predict the folding of the proteins, which is a very hard problem 
indeed, and a probably crucial one for the future of bio-computing. It will 
have medical applications, for the best, and the worst.


Bruno






 
 
-Original Message-
 From: John Clark 
 To: everything-list 
 Sent: Mon, Sep 25, 2017 3:37 pm
 Subject: Re: A profound lack of profundity (and soon "the starting point")
 
 
 
 
 
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 9:16 AM, Bruno Marchal  wrote:
 
 
 

 
 
 
​>> ​
 The only 
​ ​
 identity criteria 
​ ​
 I remember agreeing to is 
​ "​
 the Moscow man" means the man who saw Moscow 
​.​
 
 

 
  
 
​> ​
 You have agreed that the Moscow Man (like the Washington Man)  is an honorable 
Helsinki Man survivor.
 
 
 

 
 
 
​I have agreed that the ​
 Helsinki Man 
​ is a proper subset of the Moscow man but the two are NOT equivalent, if they 
were it would be stupid to give them different names. I also said the Helsinki 
man survives because the Moscow man remembers being the Helsinki man and 
remembering  is how I define "survival", but how you define survival I don't 
know.   ​
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
​> ​
 Yes, the Helsinki man is in two places,
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
​Then what are we arguing ​about?
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
​> ​
 but the point is that he does not feel that way.
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
​Oh yes now I remember, we are arguing about the identity​
   
​of the mysterious Mr. He.​
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
​> ​
 nobody can feel to be in two places at once with computationalism 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
​That is not a sacred axiom of computationalism! The Moscow man and the 
Washington man could be merged back together and the resulting 
Moscow/Washington man would have vivid memories of being in both cities at 
exactly the same time, as well as having memories of being just the Helsinki 
man. In fact you could feel to be in 2 cities at the same time even without a 
people duplicating machine, just feed in detailed sensory data from Moscow and 
Washington back to the fellow in Helsinki.
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
"I" is the usual indexical. You can duplicate it in the 3-1 picture, but not in 
the 1p view, viewed from that 1p view.
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
​Good old "the"! Misusing personal pronouns ​is not the only way to sweep 
illogical thinking under the rug, forgetting that there is a difference between 
the English articles "the" and "a" also does a good job at muddying the waters. 
 
 

 
 
 
​ 
​>> ​
 All the copies were NOT asked the question yesterday back in Helsinki,
 

 
  
 
​> ​
 The prediction is asked to the Helsinki guy before the duplication. The copies 
are the Helsinki guy,
 
 
 

 
 
 
​Yes the ​
 copies are the Helsinki guy 
​ because they are​ everything the Helsinki man was, but the Helsinki guy was 
never everything the copies are, one is a proper subset of 

Re: A profound lack of profundity (and soon "the starting point")

[John Clark]

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Bruno Marchal  wrote:

> ​>
>> ​>​
>> ​
>> nobody can feel to be in two places at once with computationalism
>>
> ​
> ​> ​
> That is not a sacred axiom of computationalism!
>
> ​> ​
> It is simple consequence.
>

​Show me how! Explain to me why computers can't do 2 things at the same
time. Then tell me
why even with todays technology by using telepresence you can feel like
you're in one place
even though you're brain is in another place far away.

​>> ​
>> The Moscow man and the Washington man could be merged back together and
>> the resulting
>> Moscow/Washington man would have vivid memories of being in both cities
>> at exactly the
>> ​\​
>> same time, as well as having memories of being just the Helsinki man.
>> ​
>>
>

> > ​
> In a metaphorical sense?
>

​No, in a literal sense.​



> ​> ​
> But strictly speaking, after fusing, the guy will remember having been in
> only one city
>

If after fusing the Moscow man and the Washington man back together
​and ​
the resulting being
remembers
​ ​
having been in only one city
​ don't you think it's a little odd that being is unable to
say what the name
of that one and only one city is?​
​ I think it's odd.​

without having been able to predict which one in
> ​ ​
> Helsinki before.
>

​So if you asked the newly refused Moscow/Washington man "What is the name
of that one and
only one city you ended up seeing after ​ Helsinki?", do you think he'd
give you that one and only
one name or do you think he's look at you like you were crazy for asking
such a thing?

> That's right, "he" still doesn't know and "he" will NEVER know because
> nobody will ever
> know what "he" means in the above.


> ​> ​
> Then computationalism is false.
>

​Bullshit.​



> ​> ​
> Of course the helsinki man will be able to answer and verify the
> prediction.
>


​T​
he
​Helsinki
 man
​?!! ​
T​
he
​Helsinki
 man
​ can't verify anything because after the duplication nobody
 is in Helsinki anymore. ​

>
​>>​
>> ​I still don't understand why you're more interested ​in expectations
>> than reality
>
>
> ​> ​
> Reality is the goal.
>

​Expectations are often proven to be wrong, reality never is.​

​

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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: A profound lack of profundity (and soon "the starting point")

[John Clark]

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 3:34 PM, Terren Suydam 
wrote:

​> ​
> So the expectation of anyone who enters a duplicator would be


​The expectations of what will happen will change from person to person,
but the reality of what actually did happen will not.


> ​> t​
> o open their eyes to a single city.


​If he's a fool he might indeed expect that, but I don't much care what
fools think. But ask yourself this, how many fools tomorrow will ​remember
being asked the question today? I maintain the answer is 2 fools not one.
Do you disagree?

John K Clark





>
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 3:04 PM, John Clark  wrote:
>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Terren Suydam 
>> wrote:
>>
>> ​> ​
>>> In this situation, does the copy that opens his eyes in Barcelona only
>>> see Barcelona?
>>>
>>
>> ​Obviously.​
>>
>>
>>
>>> ​> ​
>>> And the copy that opens his eyes in Paris only see Paris?
>>>
>>
>> ​Obviously.
>>
>
> So the expectation of anyone who enters a duplicator would be to open
> their eyes to a single city.
>
> --
> 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: A profound lack of profundity (and soon "the starting point")

[John Clark]

On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Bruno Marchal  wrote:

you must not neglect the question asked


​What question?  I saw words and question marks but I saw no question.​


​> ​
> which concerns the first person experience expected.


​Which THE the first person experience is the prediction suposed to be
about, John Clark's THE
first person experience in Helsinki John Clark's THE first person
experience in Moscow or
John Clark's THE first person experience in Washington? John Clark predicts
that Bruno's
answer will contain a gaggle of personal pronouns with no referent, talk
about THE 1p as if
there were only one, or do both.

​> ​
> I am asking just the H-man, about what he expects


​
For all I know
​ ​
the H-man
​ ​
expects
​ ​
Santa Claus's workshop, but I neither know nor care what the
H-man expects,I only care who will remember
​​
tomorrow being the H-man today, and two men
will not one.

Keep in mind that UDA is
> ​...
>

​babytalk. ​


​> ​
> You know you will push on a button,


​Yes, I know who "you" refers to up to this point, but after that the word
"you" must be abandoned.​


 open a door and see a city


​John Clark opens 2 doors and ​

​sees 2 cities.​

​> ​
> Don't patronize


No I think I’m going to continue to patronize as long as you continue to
assume the meaning
of personal pronouns is
​always​
 obvious even in a world that contains personal pronoun duplicating
machines as
​is done​
 in the following:

"*It is the specific city that I will feel be in that I cannot predict.*”

>
> ​> ​
> No, he should not expect to get tea he should expect the promise to be
> broken and it would be
> better if he expected to end up in
> ​ ​
> Santa Claus's workshop instead.Why should he expect that?
> Because he will happier if he does,Santa Claus's
> ​ ​
> workshop sound like more fun than drinking tea

Of course expectations need not turn out to be correct to bring happiness


​> ​
> Good joke.


I’m not joking.Santa Claus's workshop is as good a response as any to a
meaningless sequence of
words followed be a question mark
​.​

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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: A profound lack of profundity (and soon "the starting point")

[Terren Suydam]

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 3:04 PM, John Clark  wrote:

>
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Terren Suydam 
> wrote:
>
> ​> ​
>> In this situation, does the copy that opens his eyes in Barcelona only
>> see Barcelona?
>>
>
> ​Obviously.​
>
>
>
>> ​> ​
>> And the copy that opens his eyes in Paris only see Paris?
>>
>
> ​Obviously.
>

So the expectation of anyone who enters a duplicator would be to open their
eyes to a single city.

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: A profound lack of profundity (and soon "the starting point")

[John Clark]

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Terren Suydam 
wrote:

​> ​
> In this situation, does the copy that opens his eyes in Barcelona only see
> Barcelona?
>

​Obviously.​



> ​> ​
> And the copy that opens his eyes in Paris only see Paris?
>

​Obviously. And equally obvious John Clark will end up seeing 2 cities. And
speaking of predictions, I predict that Terry Suydam will next write the
following sequence of words "So how many cities will you end up seeing?"
and will claim that it must be a question because there is a question mark
at the end of the word sequence.

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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Andrei Linde on consciousness

[Brent Meeker]

Interesting interview (I wonder where it was...CERN?).  Linde makes leap 
though from the Hamiltonian of the universe is zero to we need 
consciosness to explain change.  He considers having an instrument 
record events, but then he says he must become conscious of the 
recording.  That doesn't follow.  Most treatments of this problem, which 
comes up in all QM because "time" is not an operator, resolve it by 
relating QM system states to a QM clock.  Anything functioning as a 
clock will serve to record the rest of the universe as changing.  If 
some interesting conclusion is to be drawn from this, I'd say that it is 
that perception of time order is essential to consciousness...so that it 
can act as a clock.


Brent

On 9/25/2017 7:35 AM, David Nyman wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gc89m2SaOAc=youtu.be


--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Infinities

[Brent Meeker]

On 9/25/2017 6:37 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:


On 24 Sep 2017, at 21:02, smitra wrote:


On 23-09-2017 10:34, Bruno Marchal wrote:

On 22 Sep 2017, at 13:47, David Nyman wrote:
https://www.quantamagazine.org/mathematicians-measure-infinities-find-theyre-equal-20170912/ 


[1]

A rare progress on the continuum hypothesis (CH). Shelah is amazingly
smart. There is that story that he arrived one week to early at a
congress of logic, and decided to follow a congress on group theory
instead, and depressed everybody by solving most open problems of that
congress! His first question was "what is a group?", and people taught
he was retarted!
Now, this does not necessarily concern us. I think. Even ZF and
ZF+Choice proves the same theorems in arithmetic. That is probably not
the case for ZF and ZF + CH, but the comp ontology will not change.
For the phenomenology, that might change something though, making the
measure problem more easy or more difficult. We are not yet enough
advanced on this to decide, i think. model theory and set theory are
*quite* complex compared to arithmetic!
Bruno
Everything in physics suggests that infinities don't actually exists, 
so perhaps more progress can be made if you use a finitistic logics 
system.


That is the case for computationalism. It belongs to finitism. You can 
interpret all the infinities which appears at the phenomenological 
level as machine's inventions to study the finite realm. That is what 
I do actually in the math treatment.


In fact, contrary to what I have thought some years ago, it even 
admits an ultrafinist reading, although you need again some infinities 
at the meta-level to prove this. Computationalism is consistent with 
"there is a highest natural number". But no need of this to proceed, 
unless we met a genuine ultra-finitist (that is very rare!).


How can that work?  In a finite system Goedel's theorem doesn't hold.  
Every proposition can be decided by exhaustive search.


Brent



Note that you cannot invoke a God or a Physical Universe to decide 
what exists or not, or you beg the (metaphysical) question. Someone 
could say that everything in physics suggest that there is no physical 
reality existing per se, but only statistically interfering 
computations "seen from inside". Look how quick people like Bohr and 
Heisenberg were to abandon realism in physics. Fortunately Einstein 
and Everett were not that quick, and computationalism go in that same 
direction.


Bruno







Saibal

--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to
everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list
[2].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout [3].
Links:
--
[1]
https://www.quantamagazine.org/mathematicians-measure-infinities-find-theyre-equal-20170912/ 


[2] https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list
[3] https://groups.google.com/d/optout
[4] http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/


--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/





--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: A profound lack of profundity (and soon "the starting point")

[Terren Suydam]

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 10:14 AM, John Clark  wrote:

> ​> ​
>> But before we continue, I need to be sure we agree that from your
>> first-person perspective, when it comes to making decisions based on some
>> future state, you only have the contents of your mind to work with. Your
>> mental model, your worldview, pick whatever language you like, it's what
>> gives you a sense of what to expect, and therefore the only basis one has
>> for placing bets. Do you disagree?
>>
>
> ​No, I don't disagree. A mind is the only source of ideas, even incorrect
> ideas, even gibberish ideas. ​
>
> ​
>

Going back to the previous example that involves teleporting from Helsinki
to Barcelona... imagine a time where this is a service that you pay for.
When you step into the teleporter in Helsinki, you have every expectation
of experiencing Barcelona. After all, you paid a lot of money to do so.
But, there's a glitch and a copy is also teleported to Paris.

In this situation, does the copy that opens his eyes in Barcelona only see
Barcelona?  And the copy that opens his eyes in Paris only see Paris?

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: A profound lack of profundity (and soon "the starting point")

[David Nyman]

On 25 September 2017 at 22:34, Terren Suydam 
wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 1:51 PM, John Clark  wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 9:47 AM, Terren Suydam 
>> wrote:
>>
>> ​> ​
>>> Then we agree that expectations are important, since the wrong ones can
>>> kill us.
>>>
>>
>> ​
>> Forget important, expectations are not even meaningful in thought
>> experiments involving people duplicating machines if
>> ​ ​
>> it is not clearly stated what is being expected.
>>
>
> You're arguing against things I haven't said. To be frank, I tuned out of
> the John Clark/Bruno Marchal wars sometime last year... after a few dozen
> times around that carousel I wanted off. So don't assume I'm going to say
> something Bruno is saying. I do expect (ahem) to be able to clearly state
> was is being expected in the thought experiment, without requiring personal
> pronouns.
>
> But before we continue, I need to be sure we agree that from your
> first-person perspective, when it comes to making decisions based on some
> future state, you only have the contents of your mind to work with. Your
> mental model, your worldview, pick whatever language you like, it's what
> gives you a sense of what to expect, and therefore the only basis one has
> for placing bets. Do you disagree?
>

​First rule of Fight Club​: Don't expect to win in any continuation.
Second rule: Don't even think about expecting to win in any continuation.
Third rule: You will not win in any continuation.

Well, you know what result to 'expect' by now.

David



>
> Terren
>
> --
> 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: A profound lack of profundity (and soon "the starting point")

[John Clark]

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at  spudboy100 via Everything List <
everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:

​> ​
> You folks  want Profundity-If this is fact, it is, Profundity itself. A
> Japanese team came up with a super-duper quantum computing architecture,
> that looks to be able to eat the Protein Folding Problem, with pepper and
> salt. I don't feel this news is too good to be true. Needs much work,
> development, bottleneck fixing, progging, but, am guessing that you wanted
> a Singularity? Ya got a Singularity.
> *https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/09/japanese-researchers-work-out-theoretical-universal-quantum-computer-that-could-scale-to-millions-of-qubits.html
> *
>

​That's interesting but they can't scale it up to make a full scale machine
just yet because existing error correcting schemes can only do so much and
their error rate ​is still about 6 dB too high. The authors of the paper
admit this but say:

​"​
*However, the requirement for fault tolerance is likely to be satisfied in
the near future by further​ ​improvement of technology or error-correction
protocols*
​"

I hope they're right but getting those last few dB's is hard.

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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: A profound lack of profundity (and soon "the starting point")

[John Clark]

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Bruno Marchal  wrote:


> ​> ​
> It is the specific city that I will feel be in that I cannot predict.
>

​Because when talking about the future AFTER going through a *"I" *duplicating
​

​machine the personal pronoun* "I​" *becomes ambiguous. Nobody can make the
prediction because nobody knows what is suposed to be predicted.

​> ​
> I can explain more if you tell me if you agree that P(tea) = 1.
>

​I've already answered that, no I don't agree. I have no reason to believe
you will keep your promise about the tea and I expect it is far more likely
I will see ​
Santa Claus's workshop
​ than any tea. However I still don't understand why you're more interested
in my expectations than the nature of reality.

 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: A profound lack of profundity (and soon "the starting point")

[Bruno Marchal]

On 26 Sep 2017, at 07:30, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote:

You folks  want Profundity-If this is fact, it is, Profundity  
itself. A Japanese team came up with a super-duper quantum computing  
architecture, that looks to be able to eat the Protein Folding  
Problem, with pepper and salt. I don't feel this news is too good to  
be true. Needs much work, development, bottleneck fixing, progging,  
but, am guessing that you wanted a Singularity? Ya got a Singularity.

https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/09/japanese-researchers-work-out-theoretical-universal-quantum-computer-that-could-scale-to-millions-of-qubits.html



That approach is very interesting. I have no clue if it is feasible in  
a near future. It looks more feasible than most models though.


Now, that machine will be able to do a million times more stupidities  
than the human.


And plausibly new quantum one ...

The singularity might be the discovery of the universal (Turing)  
machine. I think. We don't realize because we have the nose on it.


Of course, in a sense, the bacteria, and later the neurons, did that  
well before us-the-human, and indeed, that's why we could do it to.


Once there, the universal machine can only become more deluded, get  
trapped in the Samsara, confuse its higher self with the little ego,  
and mix brilliance with barbary, like with atomic bombs.


Now, I would certainly applaud if they succeed in solving, by  
simulation I guess, to predict the folding of the proteins, which is a  
very hard problem indeed, and a probably crucial one for the future of  
bio-computing. It will have medical applications, for the best, and  
the worst.


Bruno





-Original Message-
From: John Clark 
To: everything-list 
Sent: Mon, Sep 25, 2017 3:37 pm
Subject: Re: A profound lack of profundity (and soon "the starting  
point")


On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 9:16 AM, Bruno Marchal   
wrote:


​>> ​ The only ​ ​ identity criteria ​ ​ I remember  
agreeing to is ​ "​ the Moscow man" means the man who saw  
Moscow ​.​


​> ​ You have agreed that the Moscow Man (like the Washington  
Man)  is an honorable Helsinki Man survivor.


​I have agreed that the ​ Helsinki Man ​ is a proper subset of  
the Moscow man but the two are NOT equivalent, if they were it would  
be stupid to give them different names. I also said the Helsinki man  
survives because the Moscow man remembers being the Helsinki man and  
remembering  is how I define "survival", but how you define survival  
I don't know.   ​


​> ​ Yes, the Helsinki man is in two places,

​Then what are we arguing ​about?

​> ​ but the point is that he does not feel that way.

​Oh yes now I remember, we are arguing about the identity​   ​ 
of the mysterious Mr. He.​


​> ​ nobody can feel to be in two places at once with  
computationalism


​That is not a sacred axiom of computationalism! The Moscow man and  
the Washington man could be merged back together and the resulting  
Moscow/Washington man would have vivid memories of being in both  
cities at exactly the same time, as well as having memories of being  
just the Helsinki man. In fact you could feel to be in 2 cities at  
the same time even without a people duplicating machine, just feed  
in detailed sensory data from Moscow and Washington back to the  
fellow in Helsinki.


"I" is the usual indexical. You can duplicate it in the 3-1 picture,  
but not in the 1p view, viewed from that 1p view.


​Good old "the"! Misusing personal pronouns ​is not the only way  
to sweep illogical thinking under the rug, forgetting that there is  
a difference between the English articles "the" and "a" also does a  
good job at muddying the waters.


​ ​>> ​ All the copies were NOT asked the question yesterday  
back in Helsinki,


​> ​ The prediction is asked to the Helsinki guy before the  
duplication. The copies are the Helsinki guy,


​Yes the ​ copies are the Helsinki guy ​ because they are​  
everything the Helsinki man was, but the Helsinki guy was never  
everything the copies are, one is a proper subset of the other.  Not  
all connections between things have the Equivalence Relation​ ​,  
equality does but "is grater than"​ does not, 4 is grater than 3  
but 3 is not grater than 4. Personal identity also does not have  
the  Equivalence ​Relation ​, the Moscow man is the Helsinki man  
but the Helsinki man is not the Moscow man.


  ​>> ​ you ask "Which one will become the Moscow man?" and the  
answer of course is "the one the sees Moscow".


​> ​ That does not help the Helsinki man,

Well I could add that the one the sees Moscow ​ will turn out  
to be the Moscow man. That's all the help I can give the Helsinki  
man because I don't understand what he is asking.


​> ​ given that in helsinki he still doesn't know if he will feel  
to be being the M-man or not.


​That's right, "he" still doesn't know and "he" will NEVER know  
because nobody 

Re: A profound lack of profundity (and soon "the starting point")

[John Clark]

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 7:48 AM, Stathis Papaioannou 
wrote:


​> ​
> Asking about your expectations is an attempt to show what your implicit
> beliefs about your future are.
>

OK, If you say "What one and only one city do you expect to
​see​
​
after you walk into the
​ ​
that "you" duplicating machine?" I would remain silent because it is not my
habit to respond to any old string of words, not even if the string of
words are placed in a
​ ​
grammatically correct order, not even if there is a question mark at the
end of
​that​
​
string. I can't give a answer if I don't know the question and I don't.

​> ​
> if you are duplicated in Washington and Moscow would you like your assets
> to be distributed 50/50 to the copies
>

​That would depend on my personal
idiosyncrasies
​ and also​
 on how rich I was, if I was only living at the subsistence level I'd want
all my assets to go to only one of the copies, it doesn't matter which one,
because that way at least one of them would survive; if I were a
billionaire I might prefer a different arrangement, and you might like
something else entirely. Who cares? There is no disputing matters of taste.
I thought we were interested in grand philosophical ideas and the nature of
reality not the trivial likes and dislikes of individuals.


​ 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: A profound lack of profundity (and soon "the starting point")

[John Clark]

On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 5:34 PM, Terren Suydam 
wrote:

​
>> ​>> ​
>> Forget important, expectations are not even meaningful in thought
>> experiments involving people duplicating machines if
>> ​ ​
>> it is not clearly stated what is being expected.
>>
>
> ​> ​
> You're arguing against things I haven't said.
>

​I never claimed you did say it.​ Every comment I make in a post is not
necessarily a rebuttal to something somebody else said.


> ​> ​
> I do expect (ahem) to be able to clearly state was is being expected in
> the thought experiment, without requiring personal pronouns.
>

​I hope ​Terren Suydam is careful with personal pronouns too,  if everybody
was this thread would have ended years ago.

​> ​
> But before we continue, I need to be sure we agree that from your
> first-person perspective, when it comes to making decisions based on some
> future state, you only have the contents of your mind to work with. Your
> mental model, your worldview, pick whatever language you like, it's what
> gives you a sense of what to expect, and therefore the only basis one has
> for placing bets. Do you disagree?
>

​No, I don't disagree. A mind is the only source of ideas, even incorrect
ideas, even gibberish ideas. ​

​

 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: A profound lack of profundity (and soon "the starting point")

[Bruno Marchal]

On 25 Sep 2017, at 21:37, John Clark wrote:

On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 9:16 AM, Bruno Marchal   
wrote:


​>> ​The only​ ​identity criteria​ ​I remember agreeing  
to is​ "​the Moscow man" means the man who saw Moscow​.​


​> ​You have agreed that the Moscow Man (like the Washington  
Man)  is an honorable Helsinki Man survivor.


​I have agreed that the ​Helsinki Man​ is a proper subset of  
the Moscow man but the two are NOT equivalent, if they were it would  
be stupid to give them different names. I also said the Helsinki man  
survives because the Moscow man remembers being the Helsinki man and  
remembering  is how I define "survival", but how you define survival  
I don't know.   ​


​> ​Yes, the Helsinki man is in two places,

​Then what are we arguing ​about?


On the expectation to live the experience "being in M (resp W)" after  
pushing the button.







​> ​but the point is that he does not feel that way.

​Oh yes now I remember, we are arguing about the identity​ ​of  
the mysterious Mr. He.​


Never. On the identity question you have agreed with all the points,  
since long.






​> ​nobody can feel to be in two places at once with  
computationalism


​That is not a sacred axiom of computationalism!


It is simple consequence.




The Moscow man and the Washington man could be merged back together  
and the resulting Moscow/Washington man would have vivid memories of  
being in both cities at exactly the same time, as well as having  
memories of being just the Helsinki man.



In a metaphorical sense? But strictly speaking, after fusing, the guy  
will remember having been in only one city without having been able to  
predict which one in Helsinki before. He will remember this for the  
two cities, but that will not give him an algorith to make a future  
similar prediction, obviously, so without changing the protocol, the  
indeterminacy remains, and is doubly confirmed by the fusion.






In fact you could feel to be in 2 cities at the same time even  
without a people duplicating machine, just feed in detailed sensory  
data from Moscow and Washington back to the fellow in Helsinki.


"I" is the usual indexical. You can duplicate it in the 3-1 picture,  
but not in the 1p view, viewed from that 1p view.


​Good old "the"! Misusing personal pronouns ​is not the only way  
to sweep illogical thinking under the rug, forgetting that there is  
a difference between the English articles "the" and "a" also does a  
good job at muddying the waters.


Nope. The 1P/3P distinction brings complete clarity on what the "the"  
mean. The confusion arise only from your systematic dismiss of that  
difference.






​​>> ​All the copies were NOT asked the question yesterday back  
in Helsinki,


​> ​The prediction is asked to the Helsinki guy before the  
duplication. The copies are the Helsinki guy,


​Yes the ​copies are the Helsinki guy​ because they are​  
everything the Helsinki man was, but the Helsinki guy was never  
everything the copies are, one is a proper subset of the other. Not  
all connections between things have the Equivalence Relation​​,  
equality does but "is grater than"​ does not, 4 is grater than 3  
but 3 is not grater than 4. Personal identity also does not have the  
Equivalence ​Relation​, the Moscow man is the Helsinki man but  
the Helsinki man is not the Moscow man.


 ​>> ​you ask "Which one will become the Moscow man?" and the  
answer of course is "the one the sees Moscow".


​> ​That does not help the Helsinki man,

Well I could add that the one the sees Moscow​ will turn out to  
be the Moscow man. That's all the help I can give the Helsinki man  
because I don't understand what he is asking.


​> ​given that in helsinki he still doesn't know if he will feel  
to be being the M-man or not.


​That's right, "he" still doesn't know and "he" will NEVER know  
because nobody will ever know what "he" means in the above.​


Then computationalism is false. Of course the helsinki man will be  
able to answer and verify the prediction. Indeed, he will verify in  
both place that P(W v M) = 1, and all the others were not equal to 1.







> ​>​Yes that's a trivial answer but then it was a trivial  
question, and at least it's true just like all tautologies.


​> ​But can be false when used to predict "moscow" in helsinki.

​So the Moscow man didn't see Moscow?


The W-man did not see Moscow. And computationalism gives similar  
credits to both copies.





! Well then who did see Moscow, the Washington man??​

​> ​Answer this before we proceed, please. Should the H-man  
expect or not to drink tea when tea is promised to be given to both  
copies?


​I still don't understand why you're more interested ​in  
expectations than reality


Reality is the goal. Of course, stopping in the middle of the  
reasoning cannot help you on this.





but if you insist in a answer I will give you one.  ​N​o, he  
should not expect to get tea he should expect the 

Re: A profound lack of profundity (and soon "the starting point")

[Bruno Marchal]

On 25 Sep 2017, at 19:51, John Clark wrote:

On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 9:47 AM, Terren Suydam  wrote:


​> ​Then we agree that expectations are important, since the  
wrong ones can kill us.


​Forget important, expectations are not even meaningful in thought  
experiments involving people duplicating machines if​ ​it is not  
clearly stated what is being expected. And if there is no way to  
tell if the prediction made​ ​before the duplication turned out  
to be correct or not even AFTER the duplication is completed because  
of the frequent use of personal pronouns in a world that contains  
personal pronoun duplicating machines​ ​then the entire exercise  
is useless.


Bruno says there is a thing that can't be predicted because of  
something he calls first person indeterminacy, but he is unable to  
say exactly what it is that can't be predicted,




Of course I can. It is the specific city that I will feel be in that I  
cannot predict. My next first person experience after pushing the  
button.

But I can predict with certainty that it will belong to the set {W, M}.

I can explain more if you tell me if you agree that P(tea) = 1.

Bruno


but maybe you can do what Bruno can't. Nobody can give a answer if  
there is no question​ so ​precisely ​what ​is it that​ ​ 
Terren Suydam​ ​challenges John Clark to predict and claims can't  
be done? ​But please don't do what Bruno does ​and start talking  
about "THE 1p" without specifying which "THE 1p" is being referred  
to because remember, there are "THE 1p" duplicating machines on  
every street corner in this thought experiment.


​ 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: A profound lack of profundity (and soon "the starting point")

[Stathis Papaioannou]

On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 at 7:51 pm, John Clark  wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 9:47 AM, Terren Suydam 
> wrote:
>
> ​> ​
>> Then we agree that expectations are important, since the wrong ones can
>> kill us.
>>
>
> ​
> Forget important, expectations are not even meaningful in thought
> experiments involving people duplicating machines if
> ​ ​
> it is not clearly stated what is being expected. And if there is no way to
> tell if the prediction made
> ​ ​
> before the duplication turned out to be correct or not even AFTER the
> duplication is completed because of the frequent use of personal pronouns
> in a world that contains personal pronoun duplicating machines
> ​ ​
> then the entire exercise is useless.
>

Asking about your expectations is an attempt to show what your implicit
beliefs about your future are. You explicitly state that you have no
beliefs about your future in duplication experiments, because, you claim,
the question is meaningless. But what implications does this have have for
your decisions when faced with one of these experiments? For example, if
you are duplicated in Washington and Moscow would you like your assets to
be distributed 50/50 to the copies, or would you prefer that you be
declared legally dead and your assets distributed assets distributed to
your heirs as set out in your will?
-- 
Stathis Papaioannou

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.