I will suppose the message of Russell was for the list, and forward it
(without the attachment :).
Russell, dont hesitate to tell me where are you stuck in UDA. Same
question for Hal Finney.
A summary of UDA:
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/publications/SANE2004Slide.pdf
Explanation can be find in:
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/publications/SANE2004MARCHAL.htm
I recall for some new people in the list that UDA (the universal
doevtailer argument) is a proof that if we are (digital) machine then
physical appearances emerge from the overlapping of all possible
machine dreams, where a machine dream is a computation seen from a
first person point of view.
Bruno
Le 27-avr.-05, à 11:40, Russell Standish a écrit :
> I agree with Bruno. There have been a few times I've taken discussions
> off list, only to regret it later.
>
> Re Bruno's thesis, I don't have a problem accepting the conclusions,
> just a problem understanding the reasoning. I am working on this
> though - my current task is writing a book, and part of that is to
> review all these ideas on the evrything-list.
>
> Cheers
>
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 08:49:55AM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>
>> Le 26-avr.-05, ? 21:36, John M a ?crit :
>>
>>> Russell wrote:
>>> Ah John, if only I could understand what you're saying...
>>> *
>>> Sorry, Russell, I fell back into my "wholitic" lingo with several
>>> items that
>>> are not identical to the 'general usage'.
>>> I wish you could point out 'some' which I should try to elaborate on.
>>> Maybe we could do this in private exchange, to be nice to the list.
>>
>> That would not be nice to the list, imo. I'm sure people
>> on the list can trash by themselves the threads
>> in which they are not interested. We have good
>> training with the spam. But also, I think we can progress
>> only by understanding misunderstandings ...
>> In particular I intend to make somme comments
>> on a post by John asap, and so I would prefer
>> the thread stays online. This is Wei Dai non-moderate
>> list, and I know "non-moderation" makes people tending
>> to moderate themselves a little bit too much ... :)
>> The reason I'm interested in the John/Russell debate is
>> that I suspect Russell can swallow my methodology but not
>> yet entirely the conclusions; and I suspect John can swallow
>> my conclusions, but not really the methodology. So I could
>> (selfishly) be helped in communicating my work by finding
>> a sort of mean between Russell and John.
>> I will elaborate later.
>>
>> Bruno
>>
>>
>>>
>>> John M
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Russell Standish" <r.standish.domain.name.hidden>
>>> To: "John M" <jamikes.domain.name.hidden>
>>> Cc: "Stathis Papaioannou" <stathispapaioannou.domain.name.hidden>;
>>> <ncsamish.domain.name.hidden>; <everything-list.domain.name.hidden.com>
>>> Sent: Friday, April 22, 2005 10:30 PM
>>> Subject: Re: "Free Will Theorem"
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
>
> --
> *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which
> is of type "application/pgp-signature". Don't worry, it is not a
> virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this
> email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you
> may safely ignore this attachment.
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----
> A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 8308 3119 (mobile)
> Mathematics 0425 253119 (")
> UNSW SYDNEY 2052 R.Standish.domain.name.hidden
> Australia
> http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
> International prefix +612, Interstate prefix 02
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
Received on Thu Apr 28 2005 - 02:49:43 PDT