Re: self-sampling assumption is incorrect

After writing the following response, I realized that my argument against the self sampling assumption doesn't really depend on E1 and E2 being experiences. They can be any kind of events. Suppose they're prizes that the copies can win for the original. E1 is a TV and E2 is a stereo. You'd prefer

Re: relevant probability distribution

On 15 Jun 2002, at 14:27, Russell Standish wrote: > > No the issue concerns any conscious "program", rather than any > particular one. The fact that there are vastly more amoeba than homo > sapiens tends to argue against amoebae being consious. > This remind me of Jack Vance novels "Alastor".

Re: Self without context???

Dear Bruno and Stephen: Since I think I have just about finished explaining my model to myself perhaps I can now do a better job of explaining it to others. So here goes. 1) The first thing I consider in need of basis is: There is a dynamic within the system [The machine(s) change state]. I