+1 would read this post
-
-
Never wrote it up properly (and I'd write it differently now anyway) but here are some rough notes, tl;dr it's a mess https://drossbucket.com/newsletters/march-2018/ … I never got to the mutual information stuff, which would only add to the mess :)
-
y/n? 1. The LessWrong/etc. account of symbols/concepts/reality doesn’t say where the concepts/ontology come from. 2. Where the concepts/ontology come from is the only hard or interesting part. [...] N. Therefore, the LW account is not just wrong but completely wrong and also bad.
- 16 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
To be charitable to Yudkowsky, he just made the common, tragic mistake of assuming that the field called “X Science” has some sort of sane agenda for studying X and knows something about X and is the only field that has something to say about X.
-
To be charitable to “Cognitive Science,” the clueful people in the field figured out* around 1990 that none of that was true in their case, and it’s been a non-field since. * Well, Dreyfus told them, and eventually some of them listened
- 8 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
this is interesting, but does one need to have an account of how exactly representation works in order to say "the map is not the territory" (i.e. particular representations can fail to be useful or accurate)?
-
The problem is that the map metaphor is (deliberately?) misleading when taken as a prototype for representation in general. The ways that maps fail are dissimilar to, and much simpler than, the ways most other representations fail (when they do).
- 9 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.