X-Message-Number: 3883
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 1995 09:10:39 -0800
From: John K Clark <>
Subject: SCI.CRYONICS Uploading

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Bruce Zimov" <> Wrote:

		>Why can't the simplest part of the mind change in N ways? 
	
Because then it could be replaced by something that had the
integer value of (1 + the logarithm base 2 of N) number of
subparts that change in only one way, so it couldn't be the
simplest part. By the way, it's only for engineering convenience
that modern computers use base 2, you could make machines that
uses base N if anybody could find a reason to bother.
	
		>Let's say that it were something that only changed in one 
		>way.THAT is a switch, and I agree that we can use switches 
		>to replace brain parts. BUT THAT is not a bit of information.
		
Well it is, but I don't want to be pedantic, I know your using
words like "bit" and "information" in non standard ways.
		
		>A bit has a cardinal value that is interpreted through an 
		>external key.
		 
But not external to the material universe as the religious say.
The key you talk about is just information that works on
information, in other words a program. You need a lot of layers
of processing  for perception to occur, from the concert
syntactic level to the abstract semantic level and the boundary
between levels are often quite blurry. For example one key could
find meaning in a string of smudges and squiggles  and interpret
them as letters, optical character reading programs do this. 
Another key could find meaning in the letters  and interprets
them as words, a spelling checker does this. Another program
finds some meaning in the sentences  by identifying what words
modify what, a grammar checker does this. Yes, there's still a
long way to go from this level to full understanding of a
sentence but progress is being made. I hope I don't sound too
glib about this because it is a very deep problem and the core
in understanding how intelligence works, but this would really
be more relevant in a discussion about artificial intelligence
than uploading because you don't need to understand how the mind
works in order to upload it.    
		 
		>A water faucet may be a better model for the simplest part of
		>the mind in this regard than something that only changes in    
		>one way.  Neurons are non-linear. 
	       
A water faucet is linear . You could describe the flow as consisting 
of N separate streams each either all off or all on.
Because something is digital doesn't mean it lacks subtly of
expression, Shakespeare communicated deep ideas and emotions
using  only 26 letters, and DNA describes structures that could
be considered interesting (like us) in a language of only 4 letters.

Computers can handle non-linearity better than we can. The
Mandelbrot Set would never have been discovered without
computers and modern cryptography would be impossible and you
just don't get more non-linear than that. 

		>Do you really think you could survive on the
		>pages of a book?
		
Yes. I'm not a religious type so I have no faith in a non
material indivisible soul, thus the only things left are matter,
energy and information. Science tells us matter and energy are
generic so I need only be concerned about information. The
method chosen to store the information, computers, DNA, paper,
papyrus or whatever, does not change it's content and so is
irrelevant. When this information is placed in a machine so it
becomes dynamic my consciousness would return. 
		
			   >>Exactly what is it about ion conductance that 
			   >>allows it and only it to generate consciousness? 
						 
		>Nothing, other media can generate consciousness. 
			  
Then what are we arguing about? 
			  

				  John K Clark           


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.i

iQCzAgUBL0rL3303wfSpid95AQHQAwTsCQ0CW5+DTAWgLC9G1OLg7roa5lmWRkpY
GXE4eYr0hQ5yu4/pqPdwlAhB1p3rReFR7hYLuKfzsuuf6PHhifnAQVrz4YbUQeYE
qgTOV7ORaeCCf1RkUw0FYJ39kr0Qo4Smw48IC76sPVLmBCnQ9yPveRPsa3ivybnB
+AwuEZ53FkqbDhKAsO+rPoQR5hauACThR1qx9hR9beUBP0vgnZs=
=ufYj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=3883