AI 2023. Meet ChatGPT. - page 156

New comment
 

How many pages have you been arguing about what information is?

Let's say there are different points of view.

But if you get an answer, what's the conclusion?

What was the point of all this, or is it the purpose of endless discussion?

 
Maxim Dmitrievsky #:

What is the total amount of individual information measured in and on what scales can this be weighed?

and how can the sum of knowledge be calculated?

Cut me off a little bit.

and if a person saw an asteroid and gave you information about it in Chinese, did the amount of information add up?

Imagine that the total amount of information is comparable to the amount of knowledge of your mother when you were 1 year old from birth. Compared to your mother, you don't really know anything, but that doesn't mean your mother is equal to you in knowledge at that time.

 
Lilita Bogachkova #:

Imagine that the total amount of information is comparable to the amount of knowledge your mother had when you were 1 year old at birth. Compared to your mother, you don't really know anything, but that doesn't mean that your mother is equal to you in terms of knowledge at that time.

I can't imagine the amount of information because it is intangible

 
Maxim Dmitrievsky #:

there's no information on the stick, did I say there was? There are transistors on the stick.


then nothing would work, no computers, nothing. that's a counterproductive point of view.

information can't be outside the medium, but it is the ability to store information on a medium that allowed computers to be built, that would be impossible if we follow your point of view.
 
Andrey Dik #:

then nothing will work, no computers, nothing. it's a counterproductive point of view.

information cannot be outside of a medium, but it is the ability to store information on a medium that made it possible to build computers, this would be impossible if we follow your point of view.

to store data. Until it's interpreted, it's not information.

We're going round and round in circles. It's all in the books :)
 
Lilita Bogachkova #:

I believe it is necessary to separate the total amount of individual information of all subjects on the planet from the amount of information each individual subject possesses.

Because they are different concepts.

The total amount of individual information of all subjects of the planet is the sum of all knowledge, facts, ideas, etc., which can be transmitted or received by people in different forms and contexts. The amount of information possessed by each individual subject is the part of this sum that corresponds to the interests, needs and capabilities of a particular person.

Taking this division as a basis, it is easy to understand that the information known to each individual subject is itself information that may not be part of the information available to another subject. But this does not mean that this information does not exist.

For example, a person finds a fragment of a small asteroid on Earth. So, the person who found the asteroid learns at the moment of finding it that this asteroid fell to the Earth, but this does not exclude the fact that the information about finding this asteroid on the Earth comes from the moment of its fall. Hence, information is created at the moment the action that creates that information occurs, whether or not anyone observes that action.

You, and other opponents, alienate human interpretation from humans and believe that the world is interpreted in our concepts before we are. Allegedly, we gather information about it like mushrooms after rain. This is not the case.

I have already talked about the generalisation of natural forms to facilitate perception. That the Earth is not round, but only remotely resembles a circle from a certain angle. I've mentioned the relativity of units of measurement, using the speed of light as an example. My point is that the asteroid never fell, in the physical sense. It "fell" in the human sense, because that concept is convenient and common to us. Astronomers will say an asteroid "collided" with the Earth. Physicists will say that some matter, united into a single mass, interacted with other matter, united into an even larger mass.

So, what information does an uninterpreted event contain? A fall or a collision? Asteroid or clump of matter? Maybe a molecular mega-structure?

The occurrence of an event carries only unstructured data, which we collect through interaction with its aftermath. Then, we proceed to reproduce an understandable picture by applying the skills of analysis and deduction.

Even unstructured data appears at the moment of our interaction with matter. But without us, there isn't even data. Just matter.
 

Information exists independently of the subject's knowledge of that information. The amount of information that each individual subject possesses does not mean that this information does not exist outside of their consciousness. As in the asteroid example, information exists whether or not anyone knows about it. It can be obtained and used in the future when there is a need or interest to do so. Thus, information exists outside of our consciousness and is available for us to obtain and use.

The only difference is whether the observer is in a time period where the occurrence of information can be observed and whether the observer has the methods to observe the occurrence of information.

 
Lilita Bogachkova #:

Information exists independently of the subject's knowledge of that information. The amount of information that each individual subject possesses does not mean that this information does not exist outside of their consciousness. As in the asteroid example, information exists whether or not anyone knows about it. It can be obtained and used in the future when there is a need or interest to do so. Thus, information exists outside of our consciousness and is available for us to obtain and use.

The only difference is whether the observer is in a time period where the occurrence of information can be observed and whether the observer has the methods to observe the occurrence of information.

Keep philosophising, it'll be the hundredth time.

 
Maxim Dmitrievsky #:

to store data. Until it's interpreted, it's not information.

We're going round and round in circles. It's all in the books.)

Well, you have interpreted it, then what? You're going to keep the information in your head? You're going to save it on a flash drive? And then how will you process it, also with your head, a computer is no good?))))

what's the difference between data and information? information can't be processed by inanimate objects? what's the difference between who or what interpreted the data, a humanoid or modulation by waves from neighbouring stars when the signal passes through interstellar space? - in the head, it's just normal physical processes - waves and electrical charges.

 
Lilita Bogachkova #:

Information exists independently of the subject's knowledge of that information. The amount of information that each individual subject possesses does not mean that this information does not exist outside of their consciousness. As in the asteroid example, information exists whether or not anyone knows about it. It can be obtained and used in the future when there is a need or interest to do so. Thus, information exists outside of our consciousness and is available for us to obtain and use.

The only difference is whether the observer is in a time period where the emergence of the information can be observed, and whether the observer has methods to observe the emergence of the information.

Then answer the naturally arising question: what is information? If it exists independently of us, it must have material properties. Please describe them.
1...149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163...216
New comment
Reason: