Peter Jones writes:
> > > That doesn't follow. Comutationalists don't
> > > have to believe any old programme is conscious.
> > > It might be the case that only an indeterministic
> > > one will do. A deterministic programme could
> > > be exposed as a programme in a Turing Test.
> >
> > Then you're saying something strange and non-physical happens to explain
> > why a program is conscious on the first run when it passes the Turing test
> > but not on the second run when it deterministically repeats all the physical states
> > of the first run in response to a recording of your keystrokes from the first run.
>
> It was never conscious, and if anyonw concludede it was on
> the first run, they were mistaken. The TT is a rule-of-thumb for
> detecting,
> it does not magically endow consciousness.
Are you suggesting that of two very similar programs, one containing a true random
number generator and the other a pseudorandom number generator, only the former
could possibly be conscious? I suppose it is possible, but I see no reason to believe
that it is true.
Stathis Papaioannou
_________________________________________________________________
Be one of the first to try Windows Live Mail.
http://ideas.live.com/programpage.aspx?versionId=5d21c51a-b161-4314-9b0e-4911fb2b2e6d
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list-unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Sat Aug 26 2006 - 08:03:27 PDT