You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

dfranke comments on Eight questions for computationalists - Less Wrong Discussion

16 Post author: dfranke 13 April 2011 12:46PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (87)

Comments (87)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: dfranke 13 April 2011 06:12:49PM *  2 points [-]

I'll save my defense of these answers for my next post, but here are my answers:

  1. Both of them.
  2. Yes. The way I understand these words, this is a tautology.
  3. No. Actually, hell no.
  4. N/A
  5. Yes; a. I'm not quite sure how to make sense of "probability" here, but something strictly between 0 and 1; b. Yes.
  6. Negligibly larger than 0.
  7. 1, tautologically.
  8. For the purposes of this discussion, "No". In an unrelated discussion about epistemology, "No, with caveats."
  9. This question is nonsense.
  10. No.
  11. If I answered "yes" to this, it would imply that I did not think question 11 was nonsense, leading to contradiction.
Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit