Posted on 12/11/2002 6:28:08 AM PST by A2J
Speaking for others again.
You may expect that as a fairly descriptive word for your posts.
It was not merely a spoof involving alternate identities that No-kin did, but a deliberate attempt at deception for a specific purpose.
You threw out names in your accusations. What basis do you have for saying why they were banned and who they were? Is this information available to all?
I don't doubt that A.I. is possible, but would agree that the current state of affairs is pretty bleak. I will make one general prediction: as more of the problem is understood, it will look increasingly difficult.
What a rebuttal! Yes. To anyone paying attention. But please, remain ignorant if you imagine it convenient. No one is forcing you to know anything.
That depends on how you define A.I. It looks bleak if you are trying to produce Einstein on a chip. It is greatly more rosy if the goal is not so profound.
Yes, that was my impression. However, semantic information, or meaning, or the effect of the message (phenotype) is of great importance in biology. For that reason, I question the usefulness of information theory to biology. In my earlier posts to Doctor Stochastic I listed reasons why it would be very difficult to measure information value or semantic information in biology. As Doctor Stochastic pointed out, IT isn't about that value. Channel capacity may be very useful in communications and computer technology. But how is that of consequence to biology? Errors may change the Shannon information content of a string, but in biology such errors lead to new meaning.
Right Wing Professor weighs in from a thermodynamic point of view and makes it clear that there's about as much information in the Bible [or any other large book] as there is in the human genome.
So, when Yockey measures information in a protein or DNA sequence, it's questionable whether this has any importance for origin of life hypotheses.
I'm glad you're pleased. Now, how do you know this?
Everything known to exist -- all matter -- is something akin to electromagnetism.
I have a hunch you're right about this, js1138. There's more to intelligence than computation.
How so, js1138?
There's always "virtual ignore." It takes discipline, but it's worth the effort.
Don't watch much daytime TV, do you? I suppose there is a definition of information that forces a tie to meaning, but that presumes a God's eye view. For a child, a soap opera might contain information about how adults behave. For reasonable adults, there is nothing new.
The same discussion could apply to 999 of a thousand books. Or almost everything on the web.
I'm pretty sure you're wrong about this. I know of several groups that are doing de novo protein design, and have made entirely new proteins that are catalytically active. If you have a working protein, synthesizing a gene for that protein and getting it expressed would be trivial.
It takes two to tango, and DK was one.
They died for David Koresh and Jim Jones. Not only that, but they killed their own children. Of course, in the case of DK, they might have rationally expected the government not to behave like a two-year-old having a tantrum. (But I suspect many of them knew what would happen).
I suggest you go back and read the 1500 or so posts that occurred in your abesence. They were nice while they lasted.
Oh, you mean like these kind words.
I suggest you give it up and let them live with their preconceptions (and invincible ignorance) about the "spiritual" nature of consciousness. 4503 posted on 01/10/2003 8:50 PM CST by balrog666 (Boo! Made you look!) |
Call me when you have something as profound as a traffic light that maximizes throughput in the presence of pedestrians, accidents, etc. I don't expect Einstein.
Artificial "Rationality" is not what I would I would call A.I. I'm looking for something that looks like awareness. Cats are not rational, but they are aware.
Glad to see this come up. No one can say what the outcome of a completely new entry in the genome. The "meaning" of a DNA sequence must work itself out in the environment it finds itself in.
How so, js1138?
Because all matter can be expressed as a wave function.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.