― Mike Hanle y, Sunday, 25 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
Why it exists...hmmmm? I don't know, but the important thing is that it does exist.
― james, Sunday, 25 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
― Tracer Hand, Sunday, 25 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
― Tadeusz Suchodolski, Sunday, 25 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
― Alan at home, Sunday, 25 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
― gareth, Sunday, 25 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
― mark s, Sunday, 25 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
― Johnathan, Sunday, 25 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
― Gale Deslongchamps, Sunday, 25 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
― Ned Raggett, Sunday, 25 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
― geoff, Sunday, 25 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
This is why we should never make a machine that can make other machines on its own.
― Nitsuh, Sunday, 25 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
― Pete, Monday, 26 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
Roger Penrose still gets royalties for Buck-a-roo (non-repeating space-filling edition)
― Alan Trewartha, Monday, 26 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
― mark s, Monday, 26 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
― Nick, Monday, 26 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
― Trevor, Monday, 26 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
Why does life exist. Well if it didn't, somebbody would have to invent it.
― I R knowing this one..., Monday, 26 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
Is there a statistician in the house??
― Harry Hill, Monday, 26 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
RP is a world-beater on non-euclidean geom, i'm sorry, i stick by that: it was my favourite subj, and the paper i did best in. Also originator of those kewl Escher pix of rubbery men walking up and down and infinite staircase.
Who can explain to me that there Chinese room thing-o?: it always seems to me to be obvious rubbidge, so I assume I am not listening properly in the first place.
The chinese room thing-o is meant to convince you that no amount of formal machine-like processing (manipulation of symbols) will ever amount to real understanding. it's a bit of a cheap trick tho, cos it never considers the complexity of what is required to look like understanding.
but i gather this is not considered a "refutation" round john searle's way
― Ally C, Monday, 26 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
― Nude Spock, Tuesday, 27 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
It's all just a loop.
― james, Tuesday, 27 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
― Vinnie, Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)