From: Charles Hixson (charleshixsn@earthlink.net)
Date: Sun Oct 06 2002 - 13:13:55 MDT
On Sunday 06 October 2002 10:48, Robert J. Bradbury wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Oct 2002, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote:
>
> I'm going to cut the discussion and cut to the chase...
>
> > I reply that the class of systems humanly chunkable into human-sized
> > sub-regularities arranged in a holonic structure of humanly
> > understandable combinatorial complexity, is a tiny subset of the set of
> > possible systems with chunkable regularity, holonic structure, and
> > compressible
> > combinatorial complexity.
>
> Jesus H. fuckin Christ! (Pardon my language here). I read this over
> three times before I think I groked it. And while I generally agree
> ...
> R.
I'm thrown by the word "holonic". For many possible meanings, the assertion
is true. I want to say obviously true, but what I mean it true due to
analysis at the level of propositional calculus (mostly) ... it wasn't
obvious at first or second reading, because it was complex. And without
knowing the meaning of holonic, I can't decide whether it's a small subset or
(possibly) an identity. I.e., it's unchunkable.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:17:26 MST