From: Eliezer S. Yudkowsky (sentience@pobox.com)
Date: Tue Oct 26 1999 - 13:22:59 MDT
KPJ wrote:
>
> On what basis do you define qualia as non-Turing-computable?
Well, they aren't, so why should I define them as Turing-computable?
(Proof by blatant assertion.)
I ain't goin' over this again; search the archives.
> I have noticed that many grownups behave as if all children belonged to
> a non-sentient species when communicating with them. This would explain
> why some, very sentient, children outwit a great number of grownups..
Been known to happen. But it's also the case that sometimes a child is
simply much more intelligent than you are.
--
sentience@pobox.com Eliezer S. Yudkowsky
http://pobox.com/~sentience/tmol-faq/meaningoflife.html
Running on BeOS Typing in Dvorak Programming with Patterns
Voting for Libertarians Heading for Singularity There Is A Better Way
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:05:37 MST