Thank you for thanking me =]. And yes, it is no doubt one of the most structured expositions of Joscha's thought -- the podcasts are also great, but in here he builds it from scratch.

How?

Pretty sure "A New Kind of Science" by Wolfram talks about this somewhere

check the work of Michael Levin!

@@JanoDo saw him on Lex Fridman the other day, thx!

@@flflflflflfl Joscha and he had a very interesting conversation in the Theories of Everything podcast the other day, give it a go if u liked the pod with Lex

@@JanoDo Joscha Bach is my personal hero, have you read his book? And the one by Dietrich Dörner that inspired it? Great stuff!

This is futuristic and who can say , however that delegation may require some embodiment or it's simulation , a heavy lift.

1) ”Philosophy is the domain of all theories, of all models” 2) “Mathematics starts out with the simplest languages, those where truth is clearly defined, these are the formal languages” 3) “Beyond what people could infer should be done if you want to do the right mathematics”

@@jagsittermedsimonochjobbar wow thanks A LOT !!!

Oh man.. what a description, contemporary plumber 👌🏻

Your last paragraph is true, but the bit about Darwin is utterly absurd.

@@christopherhamilton3621 If I hurt your respect for Darwin. I am sorry. I am equally grateful to Darwin as everyone else but want to make sure we move away from his theory of competition or a scarcity creating a struggle for survival. Rather it is the festivity of evolution and manifestation of the next step to free will. 🙂🙂

Ncie one. But is tehre a cgotinvie oehevrad.

vowels were a mistake

Jordan wouldn’t be able to keep up…😂

... Jordan Peterson? 😳🥲😂🤣

Indeed: compelling & quite genius. I honestly believe he’s right.

I like the way guillemot whatever writes...my mind is awash with thought

@@simonmasters3295 Living beings with a brain, based on the information that they “capture” from their relevant material environment through their senses, manage a utilitarian mental representation of their environment. In turn, the interests of the material body are "protected" by an entity that, for practical purposes, "comes alive" in the brain. In the case of humans, we will call the aforementioned entity "the monkey that inhabits us." All this takes place in "an unconscious world", a world that turns out to be made up of Information, information "stored" in memories, memories made up of groups of neurons. The life experience, which takes place in the Present, incorporates new information. The information that is captured through the senses activates memories that previously participated in a previous life experience. Through the mechanism that Pavlov described, an association is established between the Past and an eventual Future. Although the Past, the Present, and an eventual Future are part of the "mental landscape" that the brain manages at all times during wakefulness, the brain does not confuse Past with Present, Past with Future, or Present with Future. The fact of being able to survive in a Present that is constantly changing, moment by moment, is proof of the above. The information that represents what is happening in the relevant material environment generates a utilitarian “mental correlate of the Present”. In practice, the survival of a body that is constituted by Matter takes place in the Present, the only "place" where Matter exists. For 550 million years the brain has been a tool used to deal with what is happening in the Present, until, some two hundred thousand years ago, the language that characterizes us emerged, which led to the incorporation into the "correlative mental of the relevant medium”, objects, things, events, which are not necessarily part of what is happening in the Present in the world of matter. Let me know if you're interested in going deeper into the topic. (I clarify that I write in Spanish and use the Google translator)

Hats Off then for the Lamba meme? 😂🎉🎉🎉

The employment of lambda must enjoy good provenance.

everything after 52:00 is nonsense anyways

Ty, I was searching for this.

in case BIT(X) is defined if defined as "undefined" then GOTO unravel Meh, your insight is better

"it is the situation that produces the output" (?result)... I sense the situation is one in which a term is used that has "been defined as undefined" and the Markov Blanket has been torn

@@simonmasters3295 not sure if there is a question or just a comment in your reply, but yeah I meant that the only time you get "UNDEF" as the output is the situation where the denominator evaluates to zero. So it's a definition. A lookup table result. Are you familiar with L'Hôpital's rule?

Yes totally agree. I interpret it differently though which is that in projective geometry infinities are describing an essential equivalence between the two “seemingly” different geometries…like how the 2d plane at infinity is equivalent to a 3d sphere…these two objects are just different perspective of the same underlying universal shape that can’t be described by the language itself. Cheers,

@@NightmareCourtPictures I am unfamiliar with the equivalence you mentioned. Is the 3d sphere one of infinite radius, I presume? It reminds me of the assertion that a slice of the relativistic light cone of an observer unfurls the edge of the cone into a 3d representation of the space at that moving point of time. I haven't unpacked the math there either, but I suspect that the object you have said cannot be described by the language itself is a higher-dimensional spinor? A hyperdimensional twistor? Something like that. Sow the wind to grow a whirlwind. But I think if we cannot describe it in the language, then that points to our own lack of understanding rather than a characteristic of the object...