Hermagoras
Posts: 1260
Joined: June 2007
|
| Quote (blipey @ Feb. 15 2008,16:48) | | Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ Feb. 15 2008,08:42) | Shithead Joe is now deleting parts of my posts as I send them to him (I'm Thornton) and refusing to display others at all.
In particular I asked him about Blipey's sequence 100011101001011100010111010101 , the one Joe says was designed since it was written on a piece of paper.
I asked him suppose he was hiking and the trail went past a cliff composed of light (L) and dark (D) granites. At the bottom of the cliff is found a series of rocks with the pattern
LDDDLLLDLDDLDLLLDDDLDLLLDLDLDL
I pointed out that those rocks could have ended up there as the result of "nature acting freely" as Joehole likes to put it.
I asked him how to tell if the rocks ended up there naturally or were intelligently placed as a message (i.e. "watch out for falling rocks" in a code he didn't understand)
Joe refused to show the post - I wonder why? |
I put it to him like that in one of my first responses. He published it, but never addressed it:
| Quote | | Perhaps I just found something lying around in nature (a set of leaves, green and red let's say). I then wrote the corresponding values on a piece of paper: 1 = green, 0 = red. |
|
This was the kind of thing I was hoping to talk about with my hypothetical: a human being who produces 1s and 0s with no apparent intelligent action: automatically. Joe won't answer, I think, because he knows that the only way to answer is to know something about the source (that is, that the source is conscious/intelligent at the time of writing). I think this also creates numerous false positives of people who see the writing and assume intelligence which is not there.
Also, Joe's a fuckwad. Can he write a single day without reverting to fantasies of violence? Imagine his basement. Or Sal's
--------------
"I am not currently proving that objective morality is true. I did that a long time ago and you missed it." -- StephenB
http://paralepsis.blogspot.com/....pot.com
|
