Re: The Buridan's Ass or the What's next ? problem after teleportation
On 24 Nov 2012, at 14:04, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal If the body is reconstituted in Helsinki from a computer program, The phrasing is ambiguous. It is the program in your brain which is copied and theh reconstituted in Helsinki (with the help of physical machines and diverses programs, but that is not relevant). then we have a version of how I conceive that the Big Bang happened. You make terrible jump. Personally, even the 'physicist in me' has never believed that the big bang is the beginning of anything. That explosion has an important role in our history, but none in the origin or realities. An idea of the structure of the universe had to precede its creation. Only in the sense that the universe has to conform to consistency, and as such something similar exist in infinities of version already in arithmetic. But the machines will not take any of them as the explanation of the physical reality, because the physical reality is a first person plural sum on *all* approximated and partially dreamed universes in arithmetic. When I say X, it always mean I can show you that comp entails X. Not that X is true. Bruno [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 11/24/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-11-24, 06:57:23 Subject: Re: The Buridan's Ass or the What's next ? problem after teleportation On 23 Nov 2012, at 18:14, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal Actually in effect I asked 2 questions: 1) It was a little unclear to me what actually took place. I was thinking regarding UD1 that what was reconstituted in Helsinki was the computer program, which could be sent as a data file over the internet, while the real fleshly you remained behind in brussells. Are you saying instead that the fleshly you would appear instead at helsinki ? How was it teleported ? This depends on the level used in the doctor assumption. If the level is high, we can scan your brain here, destroyed the body, send the information to Helsinki, and build you there a new body with a computer in the skull, in which we encoded the information scanned. if the level is low, we have just to send much more information in Helsinki, where you will be reconstituted accordingly. In all case the original brain or body is destroyed, and you are supposed to be reconstituted at the correct level. 2) So my thinking was that from that point on, any initiative had to be made by the computer program. Yes. that computer program is supposed to be the software of your new brain there. But the distinction software/hardware is not really relevant and depends on the comp substitution level. I guess I could simply ask the question that I had posed with the ass as Does the flesh tell the computer program what to do or does the initiative come from the computer program ? The flesh can say something, it has just to be interfaced correctly with the artificial brain. If the flesh play some role in the computation supporting my mind, it can be considered as part of the (generalized brain) and the scanning device has to take this into account. Bruno [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 11/23/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-11-23, 12:42:43 Subject: Re: The Buridan's Ass or the What's next ? problem after teleportation On 23 Nov 2012, at 13:18, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno: At least one objection to UD(1) of mine is this problem: Buridan's ass is an illustration of a paradox in philosophy in the conception of free will. It refers to a hypothetical situation wherein an ass that is equally hungry and thirsty is placed precisely midway between a stack of hay and a pail of water. Since the paradox assumes the ass will always go to whichever is closer, it will die of both hunger and thirst since it cannot make any rational decision to choose one over the other.[1] The paradox is named after the 14th century French philosopher Jean Buridan, whose philosophy of moral determinism it satirizes. A common variant of the paradox substitutes two identical piles of hay for the hay and water; the ass, unable to choose between the two, dies of hunger. You lost me completely here, Roger. I don't see the relation with the UD step 0 or 1. At all. If you think the Buridan problem is a problem for comp, it means you think to a very bad implementation. A robot or a sensible being will just not get hungry if there is some food nearby. he might hesitate a few second, then make an arbitrary choice, still determinist in the eyes of God, and free in the mind of the ass. Competing conflict are easily solve, by using pseudo-random algorithm, or because
Re: The Buridan's Ass or the What's next ? problem after teleportation
On 23 Nov 2012, at 18:14, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal Actually in effect I asked 2 questions: 1) It was a little unclear to me what actually took place. I was thinking regarding UD1 that what was reconstituted in Helsinki was the computer program, which could be sent as a data file over the internet, while the real fleshly you remained behind in brussells. Are you saying instead that the fleshly you would appear instead at helsinki ? How was it teleported ? This depends on the level used in the doctor assumption. If the level is high, we can scan your brain here, destroyed the body, send the information to Helsinki, and build you there a new body with a computer in the skull, in which we encoded the information scanned. if the level is low, we have just to send much more information in Helsinki, where you will be reconstituted accordingly. In all case the original brain or body is destroyed, and you are supposed to be reconstituted at the correct level. 2) So my thinking was that from that point on, any initiative had to be made by the computer program. Yes. that computer program is supposed to be the software of your new brain there. But the distinction software/hardware is not really relevant and depends on the comp substitution level. I guess I could simply ask the question that I had posed with the ass as Does the flesh tell the computer program what to do or does the initiative come from the computer program ? The flesh can say something, it has just to be interfaced correctly with the artificial brain. If the flesh play some role in the computation supporting my mind, it can be considered as part of the (generalized brain) and the scanning device has to take this into account. Bruno [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 11/23/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-11-23, 12:42:43 Subject: Re: The Buridan's Ass or the What's next ? problem after teleportation On 23 Nov 2012, at 13:18, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno: At least one objection to UD(1) of mine is this problem: Buridan's ass is an illustration of a paradox in philosophy in the conception of free will. It refers to a hypothetical situation wherein an ass that is equally hungry and thirsty is placed precisely midway between a stack of hay and a pail of water. Since the paradox assumes the ass will always go to whichever is closer, it will die of both hunger and thirst since it cannot make any rational decision to choose one over the other.[1] The paradox is named after the 14th century French philosopher Jean Buridan, whose philosophy of moral determinism it satirizes. A common variant of the paradox substitutes two identical piles of hay for the hay and water; the ass, unable to choose between the two, dies of hunger. You lost me completely here, Roger. I don't see the relation with the UD step 0 or 1. At all. If you think the Buridan problem is a problem for comp, it means you think to a very bad implementation. A robot or a sensible being will just not get hungry if there is some food nearby. he might hesitate a few second, then make an arbitrary choice, still determinist in the eyes of God, and free in the mind of the ass. Competing conflict are easily solve, by using pseudo-random algorithm, or because the probability that you are exactly divided by alternative does not make sense. Buridan ass does not exist, and if it arises, natural selection will quickly prune it of the species tree. In fact life is easily cruel with those who decide too much slowly. It is too much good for the predators. Bruno -- Hi Bruno Marchal The problem is very basic and concerns at least UD(1). I would call it the what's next problem. Suppose you say yes, doctor and then wake up after the transplant of a computer for your brain. Everything feels fine, there is is no problem to solve, you have no immediate goal, so what do you do next ? [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 11/23/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-11-22, 10:09:27 Subject: Re: isn't comp a pre-established perfect correspondence Hi Roger, On 22 Nov 2012, at 13:57, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Wouldn't there have to be a pre-established perfect correspondence between the mind of the human (or the state of the world) with the computer in order for comp to hold ? You don't need a perfect correspondence. What would that mean? Even a brain has to make a lot of approximate representations all of the time, and to correct many error through redundant neuronal circuitry. But that would require
Re: Re: The Buridan's Ass or the What's next ? problem after teleportation
Hi Bruno Marchal If the body is reconstituted in Helsinki from a computer program, then we have a version of how I conceive that the Big Bang happened. An idea of the structure of the universe had to precede its creation. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 11/24/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-11-24, 06:57:23 Subject: Re: The Buridan's Ass or the What's next ? problem after teleportation On 23 Nov 2012, at 18:14, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal Actually in effect I asked 2 questions: 1) It was a little unclear to me what actually took place. I was thinking regarding UD1 that what was reconstituted in Helsinki was the computer program, which could be sent as a data file over the internet, while the real fleshly you remained behind in brussells. Are you saying instead that the fleshly you would appear instead at helsinki ? How was it teleported ? This depends on the level used in the doctor assumption. If the level is high, we can scan your brain here, destroyed the body, send the information to Helsinki, and build you there a new body with a computer in the skull, in which we encoded the information scanned. if the level is low, we have just to send much more information in Helsinki, where you will be reconstituted accordingly. In all case the original brain or body is destroyed, and you are supposed to be reconstituted at the correct level. 2) So my thinking was that from that point on, any initiative had to be made by the computer program. Yes. that computer program is supposed to be the software of your new brain there. But the distinction software/hardware is not really relevant and depends on the comp substitution level. I guess I could simply ask the question that I had posed with the ass as Does the flesh tell the computer program what to do or does the initiative come from the computer program ? The flesh can say something, it has just to be interfaced correctly with the artificial brain. If the flesh play some role in the computation supporting my mind, it can be considered as part of the (generalized brain) and the scanning device has to take this into account. Bruno [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 11/23/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-11-23, 12:42:43 Subject: Re: The Buridan's Ass or the What's next ? problem after teleportation On 23 Nov 2012, at 13:18, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno: At least one objection to UD(1) of mine is this problem: Buridan's ass is an illustration of a paradox in philosophy in the conception of free will. It refers to a hypothetical situation wherein an ass that is equally hungry and thirsty is placed precisely midway between a stack of hay and a pail of water. Since the paradox assumes the ass will always go to whichever is closer, it will die of both hunger and thirst since it cannot make any rational decision to choose one over the other.[1] The paradox is named after the 14th century French philosopher Jean Buridan, whose philosophy of moral determinism it satirizes. A common variant of the paradox substitutes two identical piles of hay for the hay and water; the ass, unable to choose between the two, dies of hunger. You lost me completely here, Roger. I don't see the relation with the UD step 0 or 1. At all. If you think the Buridan problem is a problem for comp, it means you think to a very bad implementation. A robot or a sensible being will just not get hungry if there is some food nearby. he might hesitate a few second, then make an arbitrary choice, still determinist in the eyes of God, and free in the mind of the ass. Competing conflict are easily solve, by using pseudo-random algorithm, or because the probability that you are exactly divided by alternative does not make sense. Buridan ass does not exist, and if it arises, natural selection will quickly prune it of the species tree. In fact life is easily cruel with those who decide too much slowly. It is too much good for the predators. Bruno -- Hi Bruno Marchal The problem is very basic and concerns at least UD(1). I would call it the what's next problem. Suppose you say yes, doctor and then wake up after the transplant of a computer for your brain. Everything feels fine, there is is no problem to solve, you have no immediate goal, so what do you do next ? [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 11/23/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-11-22, 10:09:27 Subject: Re: isn't comp
The Buridan's Ass or the What's next ? problem after teleportation
Hi Bruno: At least one objection to UD(1) of mine is this problem: Buridan's ass is an illustration of a paradox in philosophy in the conception of free will. It refers to a hypothetical situation wherein an ass that is equally hungry and thirsty is placed precisely midway between a stack of hay and a pail of water. Since the paradox assumes the ass will always go to whichever is closer, it will die of both hunger and thirst since it cannot make any rational decision to choose one over the other.[1] The paradox is named after the 14th century French philosopher Jean Buridan, whose philosophy of moral determinism it satirizes. A common variant of the paradox substitutes two identical piles of hay for the hay and water; the ass, unable to choose between the two, dies of hunger. -- Hi Bruno Marchal The problem is very basic and concerns at least UD(1). I would call it the what's next problem. Suppose you say yes, doctor and then wake up after the transplant of a computer for your brain. Everything feels fine, there is is no problem to solve, you have no immediate goal, so what do you do next ? [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 11/23/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-11-22, 10:09:27 Subject: Re: isn't comp a pre-established perfect correspondence Hi Roger, On 22 Nov 2012, at 13:57, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Wouldn't there have to be a pre-established perfect correspondence between the mind of the human (or the state of the world) with the computer in order for comp to hold ? You don't need a perfect correspondence. What would that mean? Even a brain has to make a lot of approximate representations all of the time, and to correct many error through redundant neuronal circuitry. But that would require the computer to know the future. Hence comp is false. You seem to be quite quick. I am not sure I see your point at all. For comp being false, you need to postulate that there are some activities which are not Turing emulable in the body, but up to now everything in nature seems to be based on computable (Turing emulable) laws (except the wave packet reduction, which is itself quite a speculation). Have you try to read the UD argument? Are you OK with the definition of comp, and step 1? Bruno [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 11/22/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
The Buridan's Ass or the What's next ? problem after teleportation
Hi Bruno: At least one objection to UD(1) of mine is this problem: Buridan's ass is an illustration of a paradox in philosophy in the conception of free will. It refers to a hypothetical situation wherein an ass that is equally hungry and thirsty is placed precisely midway between a stack of hay and a pail of water. Since the paradox assumes the ass will always go to whichever is closer, it will die of both hunger and thirst since it cannot make any rational decision to choose one over the other.[1] The paradox is named after the 14th century French philosopher Jean Buridan, whose philosophy of moral determinism it satirizes. A common variant of the paradox substitutes two identical piles of hay for the hay and water; the ass, unable to choose between the two, dies of hunger. -- Hi Bruno Marchal The problem is very basic and concerns at least UD(1). I would call it the what's next problem. Suppose you say yes, doctor and then wake up after the transplant of a computer for your brain. Everything feels fine, there is is no problem to solve, you have no immediate goal, so what do you do next ? [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 11/23/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-11-22, 10:09:27 Subject: Re: isn't comp a pre-established perfect correspondence Hi Roger, On 22 Nov 2012, at 13:57, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Wouldn't there have to be a pre-established perfect correspondence between the mind of the human (or the state of the world) with the computer in order for comp to hold ? You don't need a perfect correspondence. What would that mean? Even a brain has to make a lot of approximate representations all of the time, and to correct many error through redundant neuronal circuitry. But that would require the computer to know the future. Hence comp is false. You seem to be quite quick. I am not sure I see your point at all. For comp being false, you need to postulate that there are some activities which are not Turing emulable in the body, but up to now everything in nature seems to be based on computable (Turing emulable) laws (except the wave packet reduction, which is itself quite a speculation). Have you try to read the UD argument? Are you OK with the definition of comp, and step 1? Bruno [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 11/22/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: The Buridan's Ass or the What's next ? problem after teleportation
On 23 Nov 2012, at 13:18, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno: At least one objection to UD(1) of mine is this problem: Buridan's ass is an illustration of a paradox in philosophy in the conception of free will. It refers to a hypothetical situation wherein an ass that is equally hungry and thirsty is placed precisely midway between a stack of hay and a pail of water. Since the paradox assumes the ass will always go to whichever is closer, it will die of both hunger and thirst since it cannot make any rational decision to choose one over the other.[1] The paradox is named after the 14th century French philosopher Jean Buridan, whose philosophy of moral determinism it satirizes. A common variant of the paradox substitutes two identical piles of hay for the hay and water; the ass, unable to choose between the two, dies of hunger. You lost me completely here, Roger. I don't see the relation with the UD step 0 or 1. At all. If you think the Buridan problem is a problem for comp, it means you think to a very bad implementation. A robot or a sensible being will just not get hungry if there is some food nearby. he might hesitate a few second, then make an arbitrary choice, still determinist in the eyes of God, and free in the mind of the ass. Competing conflict are easily solve, by using pseudo-random algorithm, or because the probability that you are exactly divided by alternative does not make sense. Buridan ass does not exist, and if it arises, natural selection will quickly prune it of the species tree. In fact life is easily cruel with those who decide too much slowly. It is too much good for the predators. Bruno -- Hi Bruno Marchal The problem is very basic and concerns at least UD(1). I would call it the what's next problem. Suppose you say yes, doctor and then wake up after the transplant of a computer for your brain. Everything feels fine, there is is no problem to solve, you have no immediate goal, so what do you do next ? [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 11/23/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-11-22, 10:09:27 Subject: Re: isn't comp a pre-established perfect correspondence Hi Roger, On 22 Nov 2012, at 13:57, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Wouldn't there have to be a pre-established perfect correspondence between the mind of the human (or the state of the world) with the computer in order for comp to hold ? You don't need a perfect correspondence. What would that mean? Even a brain has to make a lot of approximate representations all of the time, and to correct many error through redundant neuronal circuitry. But that would require the computer to know the future. Hence comp is false. You seem to be quite quick. I am not sure I see your point at all. For comp being false, you need to postulate that there are some activities which are not Turing emulable in the body, but up to now everything in nature seems to be based on computable (Turing emulable) laws (except the wave packet reduction, which is itself quite a speculation). Have you try to read the UD argument? Are you OK with the definition of comp, and step 1? Bruno [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 11/22/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything- l...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en . http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en . http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Re: The Buridan's Ass or the What's next ? problem after teleportation
Hi Bruno Marchal Actually in effect I asked 2 questions: 1) It was a little unclear to me what actually took place. I was thinking regarding UD1 that what was reconstituted in Helsinki was the computer program, which could be sent as a data file over the internet, while the real fleshly you remained behind in brussells. Are you saying instead that the fleshly you would appear instead at helsinki ? How was it teleported ? 2) So my thinking was that from that point on, any initiative had to be made by the computer program. I guess I could simply ask the question that I had posed with the ass as Does the flesh tell the computer program what to do or does the initiative come from the computer program ? [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 11/23/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-11-23, 12:42:43 Subject: Re: The Buridan's Ass or the What's next ? problem after teleportation On 23 Nov 2012, at 13:18, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno: At least one objection to UD(1) of mine is this problem: Buridan's ass is an illustration of a paradox in philosophy in the conception of free will. It refers to a hypothetical situation wherein an ass that is equally hungry and thirsty is placed precisely midway between a stack of hay and a pail of water. Since the paradox assumes the ass will always go to whichever is closer, it will die of both hunger and thirst since it cannot make any rational decision to choose one over the other.[1] The paradox is named after the 14th century French philosopher Jean Buridan, whose philosophy of moral determinism it satirizes. A common variant of the paradox substitutes two identical piles of hay for the hay and water; the ass, unable to choose between the two, dies of hunger. You lost me completely here, Roger. I don't see the relation with the UD step 0 or 1. At all. If you think the Buridan problem is a problem for comp, it means you think to a very bad implementation. A robot or a sensible being will just not get hungry if there is some food nearby. he might hesitate a few second, then make an arbitrary choice, still determinist in the eyes of God, and free in the mind of the ass. Competing conflict are easily solve, by using pseudo-random algorithm, or because the probability that you are exactly divided by alternative does not make sense. Buridan ass does not exist, and if it arises, natural selection will quickly prune it of the species tree. In fact life is easily cruel with those who decide too much slowly. It is too much good for the predators. Bruno -- Hi Bruno Marchal The problem is very basic and concerns at least UD(1). I would call it the what's next problem. Suppose you say yes, doctor and then wake up after the transplant of a computer for your brain. Everything feels fine, there is is no problem to solve, you have no immediate goal, so what do you do next ? [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 11/23/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-11-22, 10:09:27 Subject: Re: isn't comp a pre-established perfect correspondence Hi Roger, On 22 Nov 2012, at 13:57, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Wouldn't there have to be a pre-established perfect correspondence between the mind of the human (or the state of the world) with the computer in order for comp to hold ? You don't need a perfect correspondence. What would that mean? Even a brain has to make a lot of approximate representations all of the time, and to correct many error through redundant neuronal circuitry. But that would require the computer to know the future. Hence comp is false. You seem to be quite quick. I am not sure I see your point at all. For comp being false, you need to postulate that there are some activities which are not Turing emulable in the body, but up to now everything in nature seems to be based on computable (Turing emulable) laws (except the wave packet reduction, which is itself quite a speculation). Have you try to read the UD argument? Are you OK with the definition of comp, and step 1? Bruno [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 11/22/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message
