Re: [OT] (was): Robust Algorithms
From: David James Polewka (joseywales_at_outlaw.nospam)
Date: 12/13/04
- Next message: spinoza1111_at_yahoo.com: "Re: Poll: Are PCs Turing Machines?"
- Previous message: Lester Zick: "Re: mathematical language"
- In reply to: David Longley: "Re: [OT] (was): Robust Algorithms"
- Next in thread: Ralph Hartley: "Re: [OT] (was): Robust Algorithms"
- Reply: Ralph Hartley: "Re: [OT] (was): Robust Algorithms"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 02:40:57 GMT
David Longley <David@longley.demon.co.uk> wrote:
,
>Kent Paul Dolan <xanthian@well.com> writes
>>"David Longley" <David@longley.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> You're empathising with others who are behaving as
>>> you do, this is like listening to yourself - and
>>> it's stupid if you are really interested in
>>> learning anything.
>>
>>David, as a world class expert at failing to pick up clues,
>>
>> clues like "human behavioral psychology is an
>> inappropriate topic for a machine intelligence
>> philosophy newsgroup",
>
>I'm already aware that that you assent to this false statement (amongst
>many others). You don't appear to be able to grasp that what you assent
>to may in fact be false. It doesn't matter how many other people also
>assent to the false statements that you assent to.
That's right! The number of people who believe something
has nothing to do with whether it is true or false! Never has,
and never will!
=========================
"Endeavor to persevere"
=========================
- Next message: spinoza1111_at_yahoo.com: "Re: Poll: Are PCs Turing Machines?"
- Previous message: Lester Zick: "Re: mathematical language"
- In reply to: David Longley: "Re: [OT] (was): Robust Algorithms"
- Next in thread: Ralph Hartley: "Re: [OT] (was): Robust Algorithms"
- Reply: Ralph Hartley: "Re: [OT] (was): Robust Algorithms"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]