I know p

Is the mind the same as the body? What is consciousness? Can machines have it?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Logik
Posts: 4048
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: I know p

Post by Logik » Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:32 pm

Speakpigeon wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:27 pm
I certainly speak English and I don't care what you speak.
Which dialect? There are at least 50 of them!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_d ... of_English

Is it the same English that Shakespeare spoke or a different English?

I speak the dialect that has developed in the last 30-40 years since the resurgence of systems theory.
I also speak 13 other languages.
Slavic, Germanic, Mathematics and 10 different programming languages.

And I know of at least a handful other mediums for self- expression: music, drawing, animations, diagrams, gesturing, body language!

So your insistence on constraining all communication to "English" (and ONLY the English YOU speak) makes you the asshole.
Speakpigeon wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:27 pm
Every word I use is in line with the definitions provided by English dictionaries. People who do that understand each other.
So how do you go about acquiring new knowledge and synthesizing new meaning?
What do we need science for if all words are already in the dictionary? We should just memorize the dictionary and be done with it!

According to Wiio ( http://jkorpela.fi/wiio.html ) All human communication usually fails, except by accident.
Speakpigeon wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:27 pm
There's already English and it's clearly good enough for what we do here.
How have you asserted that? What are your criteria for 'good enough'?
Speakpigeon wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:27 pm
Why would I bother to learn your private language?!
It's not 'my' private language - there's a few million people who are learning it (as we speak).

Physicists are learning it. Normal people all around the world are learning it. It's just philosophers who aren't letting go from their love for Aristotle.
Like Christians love Jesus.
Speakpigeon wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:27 pm
It's your problem if you can't explain yourself in English.
It's your problem if you can't understand me.

I am in the economic and political elite. Mainstream science is aligning to my way of thought. The power-dynamic is shifting towards companies like Google and Facebook. Because k̶n̶o̶w̶l̶e̶d̶g̶e̶ information is power!

In a few decades when you or your kids can't get a job without having basic understanding of decision theory, probability theory and computation/mathematics you will wonder what the fuck happened.

By refusing to adapt to a dynamic world you are becoming less competent in relation to society.

User avatar
Speakpigeon
Posts: 957
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 3:20 pm
Location: Paris, France, EU

Re: I know p

Post by Speakpigeon » Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:12 pm

Logik wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:32 pm
So how do you go about acquiring new knowledge and synthesizing new meaning? What do we need science for if all words are already in the dictionary? We should just memorize the dictionary and be done with it!
I'm learning new words all the time, so I fail to see where would be the problem except in your own mind.
I asked you repeatedly to explain the vocabulary you use I didn't know and you never did. Go figure.
Logik wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:32 pm
According to Wiio ( http://jkorpela.fi/wiio.html ) All human communication usually fails, except by accident.
This one at least certainly fails.
Me, I'm still alive today essentially because humans generally communicate and do it successfully. There's high level of erroneous information but human communication is highly redundant and repetitive.
That being said, I'd agree there is a surprisingly large number of people who seem unable to articulate what they want to communicate.
Mathematicians for one.
EB

Logik
Posts: 4048
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: I know p

Post by Logik » Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:26 pm

Speakpigeon wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:12 pm
I'm learning new words all the time, so I fail to see where would be the problem except in your own mind.
Yes, you are learning new words FROM the dictionary. Just read and memorize the whole thing!

Then there's nothing left to learn. Right! Right?

Feat upon the Book Of Knowledge - The Oxford dictionary!
Speakpigeon wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:12 pm
I asked you repeatedly to explain the vocabulary you use I didn't know and you never did. Go figure.
And I told you repeatedly - I use any vocabulary needed to get the job done. Yours if necessary.
I am flexible when it comes to language. You aren't.
Speakpigeon wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:12 pm
Me, I'm still alive today essentially because humans generally communicate and do it successfully.
This is survivorship bias. What you can't determine is whether those who are no longer alive died BECAUSE inability to communicate.
Speakpigeon wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:12 pm
That being said, I'd agree there is a surprisingly large number of people who seem unable to articulate what they want to communicate.
Well THERE lies the problem! The only thing I am trying to communicate to you is that your questions make no sense.
And I am trying to help you help me make sense of your questions by reducing everything down to yes/no questions.

If we can't get past THAT, then what chance do we have to get to anything of substance?

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 3838
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: I know p

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:33 pm

Logik wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:26 pm
Speakpigeon wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:12 pm
I'm learning new words all the time, so I fail to see where would be the problem except in your own mind.
Yes, you are learning new words FROM the dictionary. Just read and memorize the whole thing!

Then there's nothing left to learn. Right! Right?

Feat upon the Book Of Knowledge - The Oxford dictionary!
Speakpigeon wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:12 pm
I asked you repeatedly to explain the vocabulary you use I didn't know and you never did. Go figure.
And I told you repeatedly - I use any vocabulary needed to get the job done. Yours if necessary.
I am flexible when it comes to language. You aren't.
Speakpigeon wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:12 pm
Me, I'm still alive today essentially because humans generally communicate and do it successfully.
This is survivorship bias. What you can't determine is whether those who are no longer alive died BECAUSE inability to communicate.
Speakpigeon wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:12 pm
That being said, I'd agree there is a surprisingly large number of people who seem unable to articulate what they want to communicate.
Well THERE lies the problem! The only thing I am trying to communicate to you is that your questions make no sense.
And I am trying to help you help me make sense of your questions by reducing everything down to yes/no questions.

If we can't get past THAT, then what chance do we have to get to anything of substance?
Actually you are not flexible if you reduce it strictly to lambda calculus or type theory.

Logik
Posts: 4048
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: I know p

Post by Logik » Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:42 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:33 pm
Actually you are not flexible if you reduce it strictly to lambda calculus or type theory.
Do you have any other idea on how to deal with precision problems except with Mathematics?

Q.E.D

Go ahead and describe each curve in English for us...
sketch1550693549897.png
sketch1550693549897.png (16.67 KiB) Viewed 314 times

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 3838
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: I know p

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:54 pm

Logik wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:42 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:33 pm
Actually you are not flexible if you reduce it strictly to lambda calculus or type theory.
Do you have any other idea on how to deal with precision problems except with Mathematics?

Q.E.D

Go ahead and describe each curve in English for us...

sketch1550693549897.png
Yes, space as all mathematics is grounded in contradiction. Any contradiction (division), in space still results in space...hence all is ordered by existence alone and the only problems one has are the one's they create.

To describe each curve in English, the the trillema/triad observes all language as spatial itself, is strictly to replicate space into further variations. The question and test you provide is faulty in these respects. Add the fact that each curves "name" is determined by true due to its degree of objectivity, represents another problem. I can describe each curve in any subject english wording, where the word is objective to the self as a form of internal agreement. Or I can use advanced words only certain factions of academics will agree too, thus even then the problem of wording is subject to group agreement and the premise you observe is still faulty.

All the "problems" you have...are just strictly relative to you and made up.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 3838
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: I know p

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:54 pm

Speakpigeon wrote:
Sun Feb 17, 2019 8:51 pm
I know pain whenever I am in pain.
How about you?
EB
Pain is the most self-evident quality of the human condition.

Logik
Posts: 4048
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: I know p

Post by Logik » Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:13 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:54 pm
Yes, space as all mathematics is grounded in contradiction. Any contradiction (division), in space still results in space...hence all is ordered by existence alone and the only problems one has are the one's they create.
You are waxing lyrical.

Describe the four curves from the photo in English.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:54 pm
All the "problems" you have...are just strictly relative to you and made up.

That's demonstrably not true. I have literally made it your problem - by asking you to describe the curves.

The fact that you can't do it is the very problem I am describing!

For the particular purpose of describing four different curves English limits your self-expression.

When you (eventually) admit that you don't know how to describe the curves in English, I will give you the Python code (Mathematical equations) I used to generate the image.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 3838
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: I know p

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm

Logik wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:13 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:54 pm
Yes, space as all mathematics is grounded in contradiction. Any contradiction (division), in space still results in space...hence all is ordered by existence alone and the only problems one has are the one's they create.
You are waxing lyrical.

Describe the four curves from the photo in English.



Actually those curves are waxing lyrical considering they to observe a certain flow found in good speech or movement.


Why don't you provide the answer for the ignorant?

Of what benefit is it to describe that which describes itself? So if each curve variates further...do I have to describe those too?

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:54 pm
All the "problems" you have...are just strictly relative to you and made up.

That's demonstrably not true. I have literally made it your problem - by asking you to describe the curves.


The fact that you can't do it is the very problem I am describing!


Actually I described that your process of definition is a recursion of definition alone. You claim I must describe the curves, effectively redefined them. This results in a progress linear and circular state of reasoning. I already answer the question before you posed it with the trillema/triad while observing what you ask is a false framework...hence your question is the problem, and it negates itself.


For the particular purpose of describing four different curves English limits your self-expression.

When you (eventually) admit that you don't know how to describe the curves in English, I will give you the Python code (Mathematical equations) I used to generate the image.


I can put my finger in the dirt and do the same thing and be more efficient than you in observing a curves. Which is more efficient?

Can you use state the question in strict mathematical code instead?


Logik
Posts: 4048
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: I know p

Post by Logik » Thu Feb 21, 2019 12:06 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
Why don't you provide the answer for the ignorant?
The answer is in the demonstration! I literally demonstrated why a picture is worth a thousand words!
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
Of what benefit is it to describe that which describes itself? So if each curve variates further...do I have to describe those too?
To the benefit of improving human-to-human communication. Some ideas are better relayed via mediums OTHER than English.

Some ideas are better relayed via pictures.

I used Mathematics to produce the picture!
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:54 pm
Actually I described that your process of definition is a recursion of definition alone. You claim I must describe the curves, effectively redefined them.
This results in a progress linear and circular state of reasoning. I already answer the question before you posed it with the trillema/triad while observing what you ask is a false framework...hence your question is the problem, and it negates itself.
*yawn* communicate to me the shape of the curves using English!

You can't!

Communicate to me the layout of your house using English!

You can't!

Horses for courses.
Right tool for the job.
If English is language and Mathematics is language I have just show you something you can do with Mathematics that you can't do with English.

Draw pictures!

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
I can put my finger in the dirt and do the same thing and be more efficient than you in observing a curves. Which is more efficient?
For the purposes of expressing your concepts in geometry? your way.

For the purposes of communicating your concepts across the Globe? My way!

You have to encode them for transmission over the medium at hand. English is a TERRIBLE medium for carrying information.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
Can you use state the question in strict mathematical code instead?
No, I can't! Because the question makes the answer meaningful!

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 3838
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: I know p

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Thu Feb 21, 2019 12:21 am

Logik wrote:
Thu Feb 21, 2019 12:06 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
Why don't you provide the answer for the ignorant?
The answer is in the demonstration! I literally demonstrated why a picture is worth a thousand words!

Actually I can just right poetry if you want...no need to talk about programming.


Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
Of what benefit is it to describe that which describes itself? So if each curve variates further...do I have to describe those too?
To the benefit of improving human-to-human communication. Some ideas are better relayed via mediums OTHER than English.

Some ideas are better relayed via pictures.

I used Mathematics to produce the picture!

So all that hard work just to do what a child can do in the sand? If kids where taught to use there imaginations they would not need to depend upon computer for entertainment...just themselves and eachother. Far more valuable and personal if you ask me.



Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:54 pm
Actually I described that your process of definition is a recursion of definition alone. You claim I must describe the curves, effectively redefined them.
This results in a progress linear and circular state of reasoning. I already answer the question before you posed it with the trillema/triad while observing what you ask is a false framework...hence your question is the problem, and it negates itself.
*yawn* communicate to me the shape of the curves using English!

Communicate to me how you can teach math without english?




You can't!

Communicate to me the layout of your house using English!

2 story, 25 rooms, x square feet, red brick, built in 1799-1800, etc.

You can't!

Horses for courses.
Right tool for the job.
If English is language and Mathematics is language I have just show you something you can do with Mathematics that you can't do with English.

Draw pictures!

Actually the mathematics did not do it alone, it was a computer program which intepretted the math. The math didn't do anything but get translated. As to the computer? People communicated ideas without them for millenia.

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
I can put my finger in the dirt and do the same thing and be more efficient than you in observing a curves. Which is more efficient?
For the purposes of expressing your concepts in geometry? your way.

For the purposes of communicating your concepts across the Globe? My way!

Actually I am arguing the munchausseen trillema and prime triad are universal phenomena...they are already communicated by the nature of existence alone. Even the golden rule is communicated universally.

No you are just using variations of the same principles that have been transmitted through natural law long before the computer.

You are not doing anything new.


You have to encode them for transmission over the medium at hand. English is a TERRIBLE medium for carrying information.

Thanks for stating that clearly in english.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
Can you use state the question in strict mathematical code instead?
No, I can't! Because the question makes the answer meaningful!

By the question you pose is meaningless to begin with. Definition is description. If I really wanted to describe a shape, I just draw a shape, a computer is not needed for that. As a matter of fact is just makes it more inefficient. I mean how many minutes/hours did it take you to type out that code or create it to begin with...just to create a squiggly a kid and write in the sand with his hand?

ROFL!!! Talk about inefficiency!

Logik
Posts: 4048
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: I know p

Post by Logik » Thu Feb 21, 2019 12:50 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Feb 21, 2019 12:21 am
Actually I can just right poetry if you want...no need to talk about programming.
And you are going to get no closer to producing a picture.
It took me 30 seconds to draw it and show it to you.

Tools!!
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
So all that hard work just to do what a child can do in the sand?
Are you so blind that you cannot see? I am on the other side of the planet. It took me 30 seconds to DRAW something and send it to you.

You take all that magic for granted.


Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
If kids where taught to use there imaginations they would not need to depend upon computer for entertainment...just themselves and eachother. Far more valuable and personal if you ask me.
Can you tell me how a kid from China would communicate a thought to a kid in the USA using imagination?

Telepathy maybe?
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:54 pm
Communicate to me how you can teach math without english?
Why do you turn everything into either-or dichotomies?
Learn Math AND English.

I would teach Math with English AND with a computer. By connecting the boring-theory to the practical value of Mathematics.

How many times have you heard people say "I have never needed to use Mathematics outside of school".
Fucking nonsense - you use it all day. You don't even realize it's all Mathematics!

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
2 story, 25 rooms, x square feet, red brick, built in 1799-1800, etc.
LAYOUT. The positioning of rooms in respect to one another. The positioning of walls. Doors. WIndows.

You are welcome to do it in English.
I'd draw you a floor plan on a napkin and send you a photo.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
Actually the mathematics did not do it alone, it was a computer program which intepretted the math. The math didn't do anything but get translated. As to the computer? People communicated ideas without them for millenia.
Yeah. Lets go back to using Quipu so we can communicate 200 bytes of information on foot.

Are you aware that our conversation right now would probably take 25 years to transmit over Quipu?

The concept of bandwidth is foreign to you.

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
No you are just using variations of the same principles that have been transmitted through natural law long before the computer.
*yawn*

OK.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
You are not doing anything new.
Ohhhh. You are Neomaniac? Pursuing novelty.

I never claimed to be doing anything "new" I am doing the same old things using new tools!

Programming is human expression.
Computers enable faster communication, faster decision-making.

Lower latency means faster iteration. Faster iteration means faster adaptation.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
Thanks for stating that clearly in english.
Typed on a FUCKING COMPUTER.
TRANSMITTED OVER THE FUCKING INTERNET (thousands of computers)
To philosophy forum (running on a FUCKING COMPUTER).
Received by another fucking COMPUTER.
Rendered as a pattern by a bunch of liquid crystals arranged in matrix.

The performative contradiction would be lost on you even if it was a 10 inch cock \ to slap you in the face
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
Definition is description.
Sure. In what language?

Why couldn't you define it in English?
Why could I define it in Mathematics?

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
If I really wanted to describe a shape, I just draw a shape, a computer is not needed for that. As a matter of fact is just makes it more inefficient. .just to create a squiggly a kid and write in the sand with his hand?

ROFL!!! Talk about inefficiency![/color]
But if you wanted to describe a shape.
To a person who doesn't speak your language.
Who lives half way across the world.

You would do it.... how ? :)
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
I mean how many minutes/hours did it take you to type out that code or create it to begin with..
It took me 30 seconds!

We have been at this for 2 hours now. You still haven't described the curves in English.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 3838
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: I know p

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Thu Feb 21, 2019 1:20 am

Logik wrote:
Thu Feb 21, 2019 12:50 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Feb 21, 2019 12:21 am
Actually I can just right poetry if you want...no need to talk about programming.
And you are going to get no closer to producing a picture.
It took me 30 seconds to draw it and show it to you.

Tools!!

Actually I have been drawing many pictures with words the whole time. You forget the thousands of hours of programming just to get to that point...something a kid could have drawn in the sand.



Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
So all that hard work just to do what a child can do in the sand?
Are you so blind that you cannot see? I am on the other side of the planet. It took me 30 seconds to DRAW something and send it to you.

You take all that magic for granted.

So what you are saying is all this work is so some stranger can send me pictures of squiggly lines?




Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
If kids where taught to use there imaginations they would not need to depend upon computer for entertainment...just themselves and eachother. Far more valuable and personal if you ask me.
Can you tell me how a kid from China would communicate a thought to a kid in the USA using imagination?

It is simple the same imagination which created the computer's will be the same imagination which will help us not need them and over come other issues.

Tell me why a kid from China would "need", not "want", to communicate with a kid from the US when both kids are surrounded by communities which need them?



Telepathy maybe?
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:54 pm
Communicate to me how you can teach math without english?
Why do you turn everything into either-or dichotomies?
Learn Math AND English.

Ahh...but that is not what you are arguing you are saying English cannot do what math can...one is not better than the other.

I would teach Math with English AND with a computer. By connecting the boring-theory to the practical value of Mathematics.

How many times have you heard people say "I have never needed to use Mathematics outside of school".
Fucking nonsense - you use it all day. You don't even realize it's all Mathematics!


Yes because they count in there native language. As a matter of fact, most people don't need to learn math anymore. They have machines to count change for you...do you see my point?



Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
2 story, 25 rooms, x square feet, red brick, built in 1799-1800, etc.
LAYOUT. The positioning of rooms in respect to one another. The positioning of walls. Doors. WIndows.

You are welcome to do it in English.
I'd draw you a floor plan on a napkin and send you a photo.

That is quite pointless, you keep talking about how computing allows us to send pictures...but so what?
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
Actually the mathematics did not do it alone, it was a computer program which intepretted the math. The math didn't do anything but get translated. As to the computer? People communicated ideas without them for millenia.
Yeah. Lets go back to using Quipu so we can communicate 200 bytes of information on foot.

Are you aware that our conversation right now would probably take 25 years to transmit over Quipu?

The concept of bandwidth is foreign to you.

Our conversation would not have needed to take place because I would not have had to deal with people staring at phones in front of me all day.

All the problems you claim to "fix" are either made up or equivalent to plugging holes in a boat where another leak springs to take its place.


Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
No you are just using variations of the same principles that have been transmitted through natural law long before the computer.
*yawn*

OK.

I am glad we agree.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
You are not doing anything new.
Ohhhh. You are Neomaniac? Pursuing novelty.

I never claimed to be doing anything "new" I am doing the same old things using new tools!

Programming is human expression.
Computers enable faster communication, faster decision-making.

Lower latency means faster iteration. Faster iteration means faster adaptation.

And what good is living a fast life at the expense of taking time?
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
Thanks for stating that clearly in english.
Typed on a FUCKING COMPUTER.
TRANSMITTED OVER THE FUCKING INTERNET (thousands of computers)
To philosophy forum (running on a FUCKING COMPUTER).
Received by another fucking COMPUTER.
Rendered as a pattern by a bunch of liquid crystals arranged in matrix.

Yes...and what it shows is the glitch in all your work is the human condition. That is why you will have failed.

The performative contradiction would be lost on you even if it was a 10 inch cock \ to slap you in the face

See my point, all your work is just a dick measuring contest. It has no value.


Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
Definition is description.
Sure. In what language?

Why couldn't you define it in English?
Why could I define it in Mathematics?


Actually you did not define the curves in mathematics...they where translated from mathematics. No different than them being translated from English as "x length", "x height", "grade of curve", etc. (with mathematics existing in standard language as well)


Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
If I really wanted to describe a shape, I just draw a shape, a computer is not needed for that. As a matter of fact is just makes it more inefficient. .just to create a squiggly a kid and write in the sand with his hand?

ROFL!!! Talk about inefficiency![/color]
But if you wanted to describe a shape.
To a person who doesn't speak your language.
Who lives half way across the world.

You would do it.... how ? :)


That is why you are the problem...you create problems which do not exist (such as the one above) and then have to justify why people need you...when they don't. You lie to them and tell them what is needed by creating a false problem. Computer programming is pure empty sophistry. It creates illusions through a made up language.

You offer nothing but lies, literally...lies. A virtual, unreal, world of no substance or value or meaning.


Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
I mean how many minutes/hours did it take you to type out that code or create it to begin with..
It took me 30 seconds!

We have been at this for 2 hours now. You still haven't described the curves in English.

Yawn...I just said the question is faulty. First all langauge is symbolic in nature, hence the curve is its own answer. Second They cannot be describe through a computer as the curves measurements would change from one screen to another. If it was drawn in the sand, or on a wall, where the context was not changing...measurements could be applied and the curved described.

The most I could do is say it was of "x length" "y grade" "x wavelengths", etc. relative to a computer screen of "x" dimensions...and the fact you cannot see this just means I would make it up.

All the "tests" you create...do not work...they are irrational.


Logik
Posts: 4048
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: I know p

Post by Logik » Thu Feb 21, 2019 2:17 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Feb 21, 2019 1:20 am
Actually I have been drawing many pictures with words the whole time.
This is called the illusion of transparency. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusion_of_transparency
The pictures are in your head. The words that you utter do not communicate the picture.

The pictures I drew moved the picture from my head to your head.

Words can't (always) do that.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Feb 21, 2019 1:20 am
You forget the thousands of hours of programming just to get to that point...something a kid could have drawn in the sand.
You are still straw-manning the argument.

No kid in China can communicate with a kid in the USA through sand drawings.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
So what you are saying is all this work is so some stranger can send me pictures of squiggly lines?
ALL this work? How quickly you forget all the examples from the field of bionics.

It's but one example of how computation makes human life better. It makes communication across vast distances and cultures easier!

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
It is simple the same imagination which created the computer's will be the same imagination which will help us not need them and over come other issues.
These are just empty words. HOW?

Via what mechanism is the idea in the Chinese kid's head going to move into the American kid's head?

If it's not telepathy it has to be SOMETHING.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
Tell me why a kid from China would "need", not "want", to communicate with a kid from the US when both kids are surrounded by communities which need them?
So why are you communicating with me now? Go back to the community that needs you.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:54 pm
Ahh...but that is not what you are arguing you are saying English cannot do what math can...one is not better than the other.
Yes. English cannot do what Math can. Math cannot do what English can, but the things you learn from Math you can apply to all communication. In any language.

Because the concepts of communication and information are more fundamental than their English definitions. Concepts are fundamental. Not logic.
But logic helps you express new concepts.


When you understand Lambda calculus at the intuitive level that I do, you begin to see how fucked up English is. It's messy and disorganized. It lacks structure or symmetry. It's inefficient! It's why human minds are a chaos.

I need Lambda calculus to organize my own mind. To structure the chaos caused by the wrecking ball that is English.

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:54 pm
Yes because they count in there native language. As a matter of fact, most people don't need to learn math anymore. They have machines to count change for you...do you see my point?
The value of Math is learning new concepts. Because truth is conceptual first and foremost.

Irrespective of the language we all speak at conceptual level the phenomenology of experience (pain) is universal to all humans.
Our shared language is experience. Our tool for communication is the spoken language.

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
That is quite pointless, you keep talking about how computing allows us to send pictures...but so what?
Communication is moving of information from A to B. From your mind to my mind.

Choosing the medium via which to communicate makes all the difference to success or failure.


Our conversation would not have needed to take place because I would not have had to deal with people staring at phones in front of me all day.
[/quote]
As somebody who experienced both worlds (pre-phones and post-phones), let me tell you there's nothing more tedious than hanging out with people you have NOTHING in common other than that you live in the same community. If it wasn't about phones it was about fucking bitches, getting pissed and taking drugs.

Fuck that. It took me 10 years to find my tribe. I found it in 6 months when I discovered the internet. Global communities with shared interests, purpose and vision.

Phones are not the cause - they are the symptom. They are just another form of escapism. If a person is trying to escape reality - they will find a way.

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
All the problems you claim to "fix" are either made up or equivalent to plugging holes in a boat where another leak springs to take its place.
All I am claiming is that the boat is sinking much slower now than it was sinking 2000 years ago.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
And what good is living a fast life at the expense of taking time?
Symptom vs cause...
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
Yes...and what it shows is the glitch in all your work is the human condition.
Yes. That is not a new observation. The Bible already told us that 2000 years ago. Romans 3:10
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
That is why you will have failed.
It's work-in-progress. How is it a failure?

If man is product of his environment, and the environment we come from was "the law of nature" and "survival of the fittest", then our attempts to build a better society, better environment for ourselves, so that animal instincts are kept at bay.

The very attempt to build a civilized society is our human undertaking to overcome our nature.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
See my point, all your work is just a dick measuring contest. It has no value.
Till you give me a year and a country in which you would rather live in, I am not buying your bullshit.

We are either going in the right direction (even if it's not moving as fast as we would like) or we aren't.

You keep insisting that "people like me" are making worse, so I am still waiting for the year and country in which things were better than they are today. You seem to be struggling with examples...
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
Actually you did not define the curves in mathematics...they where translated from mathematics. No different than them being translated from English as "x length", "x height", "grade of curve", etc. (with mathematics existing in standard language as well)
Observe the important distinction. The masturbation that is philosophy is always about (mis?)interpretation of that which we see/experience/observe.

The problem Philosophy has been trying to solve (unsuccessfully) is consistent interpretation.

I expressed a thought that an entity other myself (a computer) can interpret EXACTLY as I intended it to be interpreted.
I have materialized my thoughts into being using LANGUAGE. The computer turned it into a picture.

That is determinism at its finest.

You can't do the same with any other language. You can do it with a stick and some sand, but not with symbols!
I can do it with symbols!
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
That is why you are the problem...you create problems which do not exist (such as the one above) and then have to justify why people need you...when they don't.
OK. I demand that you log off, delete your account and turn off your computer. Burn it!
Do you have a cellphone? Post the burning of the Evil Computer on Youtube.

I also demand that you cut off your power! Back to the wonderful dark ages - where we had "less problems"!

Don't talk! DO!

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
You lie to them and tell them what is needed by creating a false problem.
THE fuck? Did anybody force the internet upon you? It grew exponentially in the 90s! Before that it was a dead-end experiment which had been running for 30 years between a bunch of universities.

You are chasing ghosts. Nobody told anybody anything. In the 70s Apple became a multi-million dollar company from running a startup in a garage. Do you think they went around houses forcing computers down everybody's throat?

People bought these things. With their own hard-earned cash!

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
Computer programming is pure empty sophistry. It creates illusions through a made up language.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

OK. Since you are about to burn your computer, how do you propose we continue this conversation?

Also. Can you give me an example of a language that isn't "made up"?

For somebody who claims to hate the Aristotelian religion, you sure love your Law of Excluded middle and the false dichotomies it produces.

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
You offer nothing but lies, literally...lies. A virtual, unreal, world of no substance or value or meaning.
No, I am not. I offered you a new tool.

I also offered you the option to burn it if you don't like it.

Put your money where your mouth is - Youtube live stream!

Burn that motherfucker. As to how you are going to burn Lambda calculus from the human body of knowledge - I have no idea....
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
Yawn...I just said the question is faulty. First all langauge is symbolic in nature, hence the curve is its own answer. Second They cannot be describe through a computer as the curves measurements would change from one screen to another. If it was drawn in the sand, or on a wall, where the context was not changing...measurements could be applied and the curved described.
Oh really? How is a drawing on the sand different from a digital one?

Why is sand a better medium than a computer screen?

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
The most I could do is say it was of "x length" "y grade" "x wavelengths", etc. relative to a computer screen of "x" dimensions...and the fact you cannot see this just means I would make it up.
If you were intending to lie to me you could have drawn a square when you meant a triangle. On the sand and everything.

The computer isn't at fault. You are.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:22 pm
All the "tests" you create...do not work...they are irrational.
You don't have any conception of rationality that I would respect.

In one breath you recognize that everything is a human problem.
In another you externalize blame to inanimate objects.

You want to have your cake and eat it too.

You know what the problem is? Symbols! Symbols are the problem! All these asshole mathematicians working on wall street stealing our money. Using crazy mathematics running on super-fast computers! They are stealing using MATHEMATICS!
Ban Mathematics! Ban Language!

Those lying politicians using WORDS to deceive us! Ban language! Burn it all! Burn it to the ground and start anew!

If you act on that impulse - society will not let you... We will not let you destroy that which we have built, just because you think you can do it better from scratch.

You are not smarter than the billions before you.

User avatar
Speakpigeon
Posts: 957
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 3:20 pm
Location: Paris, France, EU

Re: I know p

Post by Speakpigeon » Thu Feb 21, 2019 6:02 pm

Logik wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:26 pm
Well THERE lies the problem! The only thing I am trying to communicate to you is that your questions make no sense.

Whatever you're trying to say here doesn't make sense...
Sense
5.
a. A meaning that is conveyed, as in speech or writing; signification: The sense of the criticism is that the proposal has certain risks.
b. One of the meanings of a word or phrase: The word set has many senses.
According to these definitions, the sentence "I know pain whenever I am in pain" makes sense.
So, you message " your questions make no sense" can't possibly be what you mean.
Logik wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:26 pm
And I am trying to help you help me make sense of your questions by reducing everything down to yes/no questions. If we can't get past THAT, then what chance do we have to get to anything of substance?
You can answer my claim "I know pain whenever I am in pain." by yes or no. Try it.
EB

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests