I know it is not for me to question the central tenets of the one true faith, but actually I think you will find that pirates are on the increase these days...
Considering that web developers are limited by what browsers can render, those who write the browsers have quite a major effect on the web as a whole. Bearing this in mind, how do you imagine the World Wide Web will have changed in ten years time, and how do you think it will get there?
>1. Why do you consciously try to deliberate over any choices? If you are not free, that effort you're putting >forth - to the extent, you know, that you have decided to try to deliberate, is at best an epiphenomenal >waste. So why not save the effort? On the one hand, that epiphenomenal sense of your own agency can't really >do anything in the physical world, right? On the other, for the epiphenomenal to exist it must be draining >energy from the actually useful parts of the brain, which might be able to run their deterministic algorithm >better if you weren't shunting that energy into the appearance of phenomenal consciousness, with its illusion >of free agency and all that. So why not just give it up?
Who says that the 'epiphenomenal sense of your own agency' is not a direct consequence of the physical workings of the brain? Perhaps an inevitable or necessary one? If this is the case, the act of deliberating over a decision is really just what it feels like when the brain is physically 'making a decision'. Maybe the brain is just like a very complex logic gate - it takes in a situation and outputs a desired action. If this is the case, you could argue that it is making a decision because it discriminates between situations and 'decides' which output to produce. The same input always produces the same output, but it could still be described as a 'decision'.
In response to the 'why not give it up' questions, they are a little meaningless if we don't have free will because we don't really have a choice about whether to give it up or not...
Personally, I am happy with the idea of no real 'free will' (although compatibilism provides a partial answer) and intend to stick with it until somebody can convice me otherwise.
There are definitely problems, but I must say I am very impressed by the graphics and physics. The real time raytracing in particular must require some hefty processing. I wonder if it runs linux...
Slashdot Mirror
I know it is not for me to question the central tenets of the one true faith, but actually I think you will find that pirates are on the increase these days...
Considering that web developers are limited by what browsers can render, those who write the browsers have quite a major effect on the web as a whole. Bearing this in mind, how do you imagine the World Wide Web will have changed in ten years time, and how do you think it will get there?
Wow, these protocols are getting more and more cryptic, aren't they? :)
>1. Why do you consciously try to deliberate over any choices? If you are not free, that effort you're putting >forth - to the extent, you know, that you have decided to try to deliberate, is at best an epiphenomenal >waste. So why not save the effort? On the one hand, that epiphenomenal sense of your own agency can't really >do anything in the physical world, right? On the other, for the epiphenomenal to exist it must be draining >energy from the actually useful parts of the brain, which might be able to run their deterministic algorithm >better if you weren't shunting that energy into the appearance of phenomenal consciousness, with its illusion >of free agency and all that. So why not just give it up? Who says that the 'epiphenomenal sense of your own agency' is not a direct consequence of the physical workings of the brain? Perhaps an inevitable or necessary one? If this is the case, the act of deliberating over a decision is really just what it feels like when the brain is physically 'making a decision'. Maybe the brain is just like a very complex logic gate - it takes in a situation and outputs a desired action. If this is the case, you could argue that it is making a decision because it discriminates between situations and 'decides' which output to produce. The same input always produces the same output, but it could still be described as a 'decision'. In response to the 'why not give it up' questions, they are a little meaningless if we don't have free will because we don't really have a choice about whether to give it up or not... Personally, I am happy with the idea of no real 'free will' (although compatibilism provides a partial answer) and intend to stick with it until somebody can convice me otherwise.
He can't help it, it's just the way he is!
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/ is sometimes worth a read, and is at least trying to be more professional about things.
No, that means they found some accuracy and removed it.
Yeah, I get that in September! :D
Not everyone does though; it depends on your parents' income.
There are definitely problems, but I must say I am very impressed by the graphics and physics. The real time raytracing in particular must require some hefty processing. I wonder if it runs linux...
640K is more than anyone will ever need... Hmm.
"Three and a bit"
That's cool. I've been waiting for somebody to come up with a phone for fat people like myself.