On Thursday, March 7, 2013 12:56:01 PM UTC-5, William R. Buckley wrote:
>
>
>
> The context takes all action, to include the action
>
> of doing nothing at all.
>
>
>
> Once the signal is given by the transmitter, then sure it is up to the
> receiver of the signal to interpret it. How the t
The context takes all action, to include the action
of doing nothing at all.
Once the signal is given by the transmitter, then sure it is up to the
receiver of the signal to interpret it. How the transmitter formats the
signal will influence the receiver's reception and interpretation
poss
h an alien civilization for the first time. It doesn't
care whether it is running or not.
Craig
>
>
> wrb
>
>
>
> *From:* everyth...@googlegroups.com [mailto:
> everyth...@googlegroups.com ] *On Behalf Of *Craig Weinberg
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 07, 2013 8:
text if you are designing a
communications system. I don't have an opinion on whether Shannon and
semiotics are unrelated. Depends how you want to consider them.
Craig
>
>
> wrb
>
>
>
> *From:* everyth...@googlegroups.com [mailto:
> everyth...@googlegroups
: Re: Messages Aren't Made of Information
On Thursday, March 7, 2013 12:21:57 PM UTC-5, William R. Buckley wrote:
Craig:
When you say that "interpretation is consciousness" you contradict
your prior statements regarding semiosis, that acceptance and action
are not value.
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 8:33 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Messages Aren't Made of Information
On Thursday, March 7, 2013 1:39:25 AM UTC-5, William R. Buckley wrote:
I have before claimed that the computer is
a good example of the power of semiosis.
It is s
Craig
>
> wrb
>
>
>
> *From:* everyth...@googlegroups.com [mailto:
> everyth...@googlegroups.com ] *On Behalf Of *Craig Weinberg
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 07, 2013 8:05 AM
> *To:* everyth...@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* Re: Messages Aren't Made of Information
>
>
&g
: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Messages Aren't Made of Information
On Wednesday, March 6, 2013 12:09:28 PM UTC-5, William R. Buckley wrote:
Now we are getting some place.
Exactly. There is simply action.
Contexts react to sign.
They react to their interpretations
, March 07, 2013 8:10 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Messages Aren't Made of Information
On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 10:55:31 PM UTC-5, William R. Buckley wrote:
The falling tree makes sound, the wind make sound, the . makes sound
regardless of your presence (or the pre
nberg
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 8:05 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Messages Aren't Made of Information
On Thursday, March 7, 2013 6:55:25 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 05 Mar 2013, at 19:14, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 12:03:28 PM U
On Thursday, March 7, 2013 1:39:25 AM UTC-5, William R. Buckley wrote:
>
> I have before claimed that the computer is
> a good example of the power of semiosis.
>
> It is simple enough to see that the mere
> construction of a Turing machine confers
> upon that machine the ability to recognise
Behalf Of *Craig Weinberg
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 06, 2013 4:12 AM
> *To:* everyth...@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* Re: Messages Aren't Made of Information
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 5:48:19 PM UTC-5, William R. Buckley wrote:
>
> Craig:
&
to do with human
experience, its ontology.
Craig
>
>
> wrb
>
>
>
> *From:* everyth...@googlegroups.com [mailto:
> everyth...@googlegroups.com ] *On Behalf Of *Craig Weinberg
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 05, 2013 7:34 PM
> *To:* everyth...@googlegroups.com
>
ust machines.
>
> Craig
>
>
>>
>> wrb
>>
>>
>> *From:* everyth...@googlegroups.com [mailto:everyth...@googlegroups.com]
>> *On Behalf Of *Craig Weinberg
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 05, 2013 5:24 AM
>> *To:* everyth...@googlegroups.com
&g
On 06 Mar 2013, at 00:03, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 3/5/2013 3:03 PM, William R. Buckley wrote:
Craig,
You build an automaton, place it and turn it on, and from that
point in time forward
the automaton reacts to acceptable information all on its own.
You contradict yourself – - I don
e as natural machines may not be just machines.
Man-made machines may be just machines.
Craig
wrb
From: everyth...@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everyth...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Craig Weinberg
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 5:24 AM
To: everyth...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re
I have before claimed that the computer is
a good example of the power of semiosis.
It is simple enough to see that the mere
construction of a Turing machine confers
upon that machine the ability to recognise
all computations; to generate the yield of
such computations.
In this sense, a progr
@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Craig Weinberg
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2013 4:12 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Messages Aren't Made of Information
On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 5:48:19 PM UTC-5, William R. Buckley wrote:
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2013 4:12 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Messages Aren't Made of Information
On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 5:48:19 PM UTC-5, William R. Buckley wrote:
Craig:
The mistake you make is clearly stated in your words:
“…doesn’t mean that
] *On Behalf Of *Craig Weinberg
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 05, 2013 1:27 PM
> *To:* everyth...@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* Re: Messages Aren't Made of Information
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 3:07:00 PM UTC-5, William R. Buckley wrote:
>
> The fact tha
Craig Weinberg
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 7:34 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Messages Aren't Made of Information
On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 5:52:32 PM UTC-5, William R. Buckley wrote:
I do not hold that the acceptor must exist, for then I
am making a value jud
th...@googlegroups.com ] *On Behalf Of *John Mikes
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 05, 2013 1:13 PM
> *To:* everyth...@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* Re: Messages Aren't Made of Information
>
>
>
> Dear Bil B. you probably have thought in these lines during similar long
> perio
On 3/5/2013 3:03 PM, William R. Buckley wrote:
Craig,
You build an automaton, place it and turn it on, and from that point
in time forward
the automaton reacts to acceptable information all on its own.
You contradict yourself -- - I don't think it has to be human --
machines only help
no
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Mikes
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 1:13 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Messages Aren't Made of Information
Dear Bil B. you probably have thought in these lines during si
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Craig Weinberg
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 1:27 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Messages Aren't Made of Information
On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 3:07:00 PM UTC-5, William R. Buckley wrote:
The fact that a machine can act
On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 4:19:31 PM UTC-5, William R. Buckley wrote:
>
> The machine is informed.
>
Trivially, yes, but information is all about multiple levels. My mailbox
could be informed when it receives mail - but that's just a figure of
speech. No machine is ever literally or richly i
l
zeitgeists...these are not forms relating to forms.
Craig
>
>
> wrb
>
>
>
> *From:* everyth...@googlegroups.com [mailto:
> everyth...@googlegroups.com ] *On Behalf Of *Craig Weinberg
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 05, 2013 10:37 AM
> *To:* everyth...@googlegroups.
PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Messages Aren't Made of Information
On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 3:03:31 PM UTC-5, William R. Buckley wrote:
Craig,
You build an automaton, place it and turn it on, and from that point in time
forward
the automaton reacts to accep
Dear Bil B. you probably have thought in these lines during similar long
periods as I did. It was ~2 decades ago when I defined
i n f o r m a t i o n as something with (at least) 2 ends:
1. the notion (in whatever format it shows up) - and
2. the acceptor (adjusting the notion in whatever context
s natural machines may not be just machines.
> Man-made machines may be just machines.
>
> Craig
>
>
>
> wrb
>
>
>
> *From:* everyth...@googlegroups.com [mailto:everyth...@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Craig Weinberg
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 05, 20
forms in certain proscribed ways.
You cannot demonstrate otherwise.
wrb
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Craig Weinberg
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 10:37 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Messages Aren&#
thing-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Craig Weinberg
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 10:14 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Messages Aren't Made of Information
On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 12:03:28 PM UTC-5, William R. Buckley wro
On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 3:53:31 AM UTC-5, Alberto G.Corona wrote:
>
> Let´s say that what we call "information" is an extended form of sensory
> input. What makes this input "information" is the usability of this input
> for reducing the internal entropy of the receiver or increase the intern
Weinberg
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 05, 2013 5:24 AM
> *To:* everyth...@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* Re: Messages Aren't Made of Information
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 2:06:20 AM UTC-5, William R. Buckley wrote:
>
> There is information (I take infor
-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Craig Weinberg
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 5:24 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Messages Aren't Made of Information
On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 2:06:20 AM UTC-5, William R. Buckley wrote:
There is info
On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 2:06:20 AM UTC-5, William R. Buckley wrote:
>
> There is information (I take information to be a
> manifestation of entropy) and it is always represented
> in the form of a pattern (a distribution) of the units
> of mass/energy of which the Universe is composed.
I
Let´s say that what we call "information" is an extended form of sensory
input. What makes this input "information" is the usability of this input
for reducing the internal entropy of the receiver or increase the internal
order. The receiver can be a machine, a cell, a person or a society for
examp
There is information (I take information to be a
manifestation of entropy) and it is always represented
in the form of a pattern (a distribution) of the units
of mass/energy of which the Universe is composed. I
think that semiotic signs are simply specific bits
of information; I will use the
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Craig Weinberg
Sent: Saturday, March 02, 2013 4:48 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Messages Aren't Made of Information
On Saturday, March 2, 2013 6:40:44 PM UTC-5, Will
On Saturday, March 2, 2013 6:40:44 PM UTC-5, William R. Buckley wrote:
>
> Craig:
>
>
>
> The truth of your statement is no reply to my claim, that how another
>
> receiver of signs responds is irrelevant to your knowledge, save the one
>
> case of conveyance of knowledge between semiotic uni
transmission.
wrb
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Craig Weinberg
Sent: Saturday, March 02, 2013 1:50 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Messages Aren't Made of Information
On Saturday, March 2, 2013 3:59:14 P
On Saturday, March 2, 2013 3:59:14 PM UTC-5, William R. Buckley wrote:
>
>
>
> >I can use a phonetic transliteration to recite an Arabic
> >prayer without even knowing what words are being spoken,
> >let alone the meaning of those words.
>
> If your argument is that you have no knowledge
>I can use a phonetic transliteration to recite an Arabic
>prayer without even knowing what words are being spoken,
>let alone the meaning of those words.
If your argument is that you have no knowledge of what you
are doing, of the sounds you make in recitation, then you
have capitulated
hat you don't understand semiotic theory.
>
No, I agree, that's my point. The software has no local interpretation of
realism, it will respond in the expected way to any given data stream
regardless of origin. While we might respond to conditions in a similar
way as a brain in a vat,
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Craig Weinberg
Sent: Saturday, March 02, 2013 6:02 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Messages Aren't Made of Information
On Saturday, March 2, 2013 12:37:15 AM UTC-5, Brent
> >
> > wrb
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: everyth...@googlegroups.com
> >> [mailto:everything-
> >> li...@googlegroups.com ] On Behalf Of meekerdb
> >> Sent: Friday, March 01, 2013 7:11 PM
> >>
On Friday, March 1, 2013 8:27:54 PM UTC-5, William R. Buckley wrote:
>
>
> >Thinking about how information content of a message
>
> Big mistake. Information is never contained with but
> exactly one exception, an envelope.
>
I was intentionally starting out from the common assumption that me
ave been interpreted as a 'geological specimen'.
Brent
wrb
-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-
l...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of meekerdb
Sent: Friday, March 01, 2013 7:11 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Messages
rch 01, 2013 7:11 PM
> To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: Messages Aren't Made of Information
>
> On 3/1/2013 5:27 PM, William R. Buckley wrote:
> >> Thinking about how information content of a message
> > Big mistake. Information is never containe
On 3/1/2013 5:27 PM, William R. Buckley wrote:
Thinking about how information content of a message
Big mistake. Information is never contained with but
exactly one exception, an envelope.
I made this point with Jesper Hoffmeyer regarding a
statement in his book Biosemiotics, that information
i
>Thinking about how information content of a message
Big mistake. Information is never contained with but
exactly one exception, an envelope.
I made this point with Jesper Hoffmeyer regarding a
statement in his book Biosemiotics, that information
is represented but not contained in that repr
51 matches
Mail list logo
