RE: Implementation

From: Higgo James <>
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 10:59:36 +0100

I fail to see how the format of the inputs, eg ASCII, has any bearing on the
discussion. I have an optical system than converts data such as colours into
electrical signals, like a keyboard converts ascii characters into
electrical signals and a monitor convert them back.

I was built by chance and necessity, which created a highly-compressed HLUT
as an evolutionary tool.

Clearly this is a major philosophical difference we have. I think that those
on my & Hans's (and Dennett's) side of the fence will have more luck
progressing discussions of consciousness, and building conscious machines,
than those on the other side.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gilles HENRI []
> Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 1999 10:14 AM
> To: ''
> Subject: RE: Implementation
> >Oh, honestly, Gilles! You send us to your website just for that qualia
> >nonsense?
> >
> James I KNOW you are not a HLUT as defined by Hans.
> HLUT is programmed only to handle ASCII characters ONLY. The number of
> lines in my messages is actually depending on the size of your window and
> its visual appearance. I could have put colors if your mailer accept them
> and ask you which color you are seeing. I could have put a picture on my
> web page and ask you what you saw on the picture. The information you get
> is not brought by words.
> >Firstly, you say 'if you arrive at this web page, I know you are not a
> >HLUT'. I can prove that is wrong immediately: I submitted your page to a
> web
> >spidering HLUT called Scooter, who has probably visited it by now.
> Scooter is NOT a HLUT if it visits my page. Again HLUT is only able to
> send ASCII characters which are unable to create a connexion in a binary
> form. The human being give sense to the language because it is related to
> qualia : when you say "it's green" you really see green. When you say "
> I'm hungry" you are really hungry. A HLUT has no way to feel that just
> because there is no place in its program to handle this kind of
> information. If its answer depends on it, it will be unable to react like
> a human being.
> You probably reacted to the http adress by really clicking on your mouse
> - something impossible for a program. Of course you can now write a
> program which handle http addresses because you know it exists. But can
> you NOW write a program that will be able to handle this kind of
> information in ten years, when it may be that we communicate with
> computers just by touching the screen or speaking? You have now no idea of
> how it will be done and the binary procedures they will use. The
> information is NOT available for normal human beings who will just know
> they have to perform some physical task (unless you are working in
> computer networks, you are probably totally unaware of what your computer
> is actually doing when you click on Web address!!)
> If you are not convinced, can you ask your super HLUT how is the weather
> today in England? (I have many other questions in store!!)
> >Secondly, I assure you I have no 'qualia'. You get confused woith
> 'internal'
> >and 'external' sensations and actions because you don't realise that your
> >brain is not one siingle processor, but millions of complex systems, all
> >interacting and each with it's own 'internal' and 'external'. I just have
> >various inputs and outputs to various parts of my compressed HLUT. To
> some
> >neurones, the inputs are outputs of the other neurones, and vice versa.
> IF you are able to handle all visual, auditive, internal sensations like a
> human and associate them correctly with a language, you are actually a
> human-like machine but not a HLUT (actually Hans estimated that a HLUT
> would need 10^(10^13) nodes ONLY for language, whereas the known Universe
> has only 10^80 particles...) So bravo to the one who built you!! I think
> he will earn more money than Bill Gates...
> Gilles
Received on Tue Aug 03 1999 - 03:02:28 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:06 PST