[extropy-chat] Depressing thought of the day

[Brett Paatsch]

Eliezer S. Yudkowsky writes:

> Ones and zeroes.  We can see them completely and clearly; 
> the entire realm is absolutely under our control; it is a world 
> that we built and that runs entirely on our rules.  Destroying 
> the intruder is as easy as making the  decision.
> 
> And yet we still can't get rid of spam.
> 
> Active shields against grey goo?  Yeah, right.

I don't mean to be a smart arse Eliezer, I mean I *really* don't
mean to be, but I seem to be having a little trouble winding in
the hyper-philosopher at present and it is in that context that 
I wonder if your starting assertion is correct. I think maybe your
angst(?) about grey goo, rolled back to concern about spam may
further roll back to an essential misunderstanding in your first
proposition.

We can see 1s and 0's completely and clearly (but not in context) 
taken one digit at a time but we *never* encounter there meaning 
without some other contextual information accompanying them to
tell us what the 1's and 0's mean. A one can be a 'label' like the 
number on ones address eg. 1 First Street, or the digit or numeral
or symbol 1 (or 0) can mean other things. 

Further the 1's and 0's when put together in streams don't simply
convey extra potential arithmetic meaning,  the new combinations
to the interpreter of the message (as opposed to the writer) who
may not be sure of the intended context (faces geometric)
increases in potential meaning. 

Context is vital to readers of symbols even in binary bitstreams.
If the reader can't discern some sort of additional meta context
from the writer that is not contained in just the bitstreams then
the reader is doomed to flounder around in infinite possible 
interpretations. Or so it seems to me. In practice of course
in human interactions we don't encounter bitstreams without
context we always have some context and no particular human
ever lived in a world of bitstreams before they lived in a social
world. The bitstreams are therefore fundamental in a way, but
secondary in another way. What was fundamental to the first
counters or imbue-ers of meaning to bitstreams was some extra
context between conveyers of a message.  Context cannot
be contained in a disembodied message.  

Perhaps that is as clear as mud. But I'm not stuck with grey goo
or spam problems I'm stuck with people who really don't seem
to know what they are talking about. (No specific slur or insult
intended at all - I'm speaking matter of factly as that's just how 
things are seeming to me at present.)

Regards,
Brett