On Fri, 26 Sep 2008, comex wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 1:48 PM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hmm, I wonder if the whole thing just simply triggers the self-contradictory
>> clause, i.e. it's self-contradictory for a ratification to ratify that a
>> non-person published a message, because it is impossible for non-persons
>> to originate messages as primal causal agents (CFJ 1895).  -Goethe
>
> What does CFJ 1895 have to do with this?  When Googlebot makes PNP
> send a message, the primal causal agent is clearly the PNP,
> notwithstanding R2170, which forces us to tortuously look up the chain
> for any vaguely responsible first-class person in order to find the
> message's Executor.  If PNP suddenly became a private contract, its
> ability to send messages would not be thereby cut off.

I utterly reject that notion.

There's nothing tortuous about it.  No matter how you slice it, there's
a set of conscious, thinking, Turing-test-passing entities that have
fundamental controls that are behind every shell we've allowed to register,
that are "final" causal agents, in that things are sent because "they"
want them to be sent.  It might be a "collective" They that set an
automatic process in motion, but it's still comes down to such entities.
Hide the shells all you want, but we thinking entities are still the 
originating "cause" of all game actions.  (Yes, I believe it ultimately
comes down to the source of Free Will; even if Free Will doesn't exist
we are playing agora as if it does).

I will change my tune the day you show me that a group of you have let
loose a new entity that on its own can actually pass a turing test etc.

-Goethe



Reply via email to