Isn’t that exactly what is in question here? Words on a screen via LessWrong, the ‘implementation details’, may or may not be what’s preventing us from having a cogent discussion on meta-memes…
If implementation details are irrelevant a priori, then there should be nothing stopping you from clearly stating why you believe so, one way or the other.
What do the components of the rocket represent in this analogy? Or is it more of a general argument for the need to develop the components before being able to credibly speculate on rocket building itself?
I’m having trouble visualizing any ‘PKM’ system that has any recognizable similarity at all with the method of information storage employed by the human brain, though this is not fully understood either. Can you explain how you organize yours in more detail?
How does one learn to recognize their first self-referential map? (Or if it’s instinctual, how did the first of our progenitors recognize the very first self-referential map?)
EDIT: I’m not even sure how it can be possible to deterimine if one’s maps are sufficiently self-referential. What do we compare it to?
If you haven’t ever experienced it, how did you ascertain that meta-meta-thoughts exist?
Also, you don’t believe there’s a distinction between notes stored on paper, or computer, and thoughts stored in human memory?
Did you intend to answer the above question? If so, I don’t quite follow your programming analogy.
See my above response to Olomana.
How did you ascertain there is no need for higher levels beforehand?
A meta-meta-note seems straightforward to construct because interactions with notes, meta-notes, meta-meta-notes, etc., are carried out in the same manner, i.e. linearly. But thoughts are different, since you cannot combine several dozen thoughts into a meta-meta-thought, unlike notes. (maybe that would work in a hive mind?)
How would you think meta-meta-rationally? Can you give an example?
There may or may not be a vicious infinite regress so I left it ambiguous as to whether that itself is a ‘problem’. In any case, it seems extremely difficult to derive anything from a meta-meta-etc-rationality. How exactly would it be applied?
What of non-linguistic developments? For example, an AI can theoretically be trained with just visual models, which are inexhaustible.
How did they arise by selection without the aforementioned information processing occurring at some point in time? (Whether on the conscious or subconscious level)
> Know-how or practical knowledge doesn’t have to be founded on know-that or theoretical knowledge.
It doesn’t. But your nervous system still had to receive and process information to acquire any ‘know-how’ or ‘practical knowledge’ as well.
Instinctual behaviours, such as the gag reflex, yawning, etc., may be encoded in the DNA and/or epigenes, but even then some ancient ancestor must have learned both at some point via the same information processing.
Regardless of how much harder they may be to manipulate, they can never be invulnerable. Which implies that given enough time, all principles, even the strongest, are subject to change.
This would imply every animal has some degree of ‘mind’. As they all react to external stimuli, to some extent, at birth.
The supposed military mission of a satellite snatcher doesn’t make sense as by the late 70s both sides had the means to monitor all their satellites 24⁄7 and could detect if a satellite was taken or modified somehow, and could supply credible evidence to every other country, the UN, etc., of such an event. Needless to say, this would just lead to an escalation spiral and/or be an embarrassment.
Which is likely why the US never tried to snatch a Soviet/Russian satellite, and the capability remained unused.
Maybe the US Air Force and/or Pentagon knew this already but insisted anyways just so they could get a veto on the project they knew would be unaffordable on a purely civilian basis. i.e. this would imply they sabotaged NASA to preserve their importance.
The more prosaic reason for such an inefficient design is simple pork barrel politics.
Since the true details of the black budget in the US are mysterious to me as well, I’d rather not speculate.
But here’s an anecdote involving Kosygin about how detached politics and economics can become, even if everyone of high authority in the country are literally on the same committee. Which may partially answer your question.
“I would say that he [Kosygin] was a man who wanted to engage not in politics, but only in economics. He didn’t like Khrushchev, he didn’t like Brezhnev very much. When I asked him about the program of transition to communism by the year 2000, which is part of the CPSU program, he replied: “It does not concern me, I did not participate in this matter.” But somehow, when we were alone, I asked: “But where did the numbers come from? It should have passed through you, shouldn’t it?” “No,” he says, “I wasn’t consulted.” “But you showed me your report, there are other figures.” And he answers: “Well, it’s clear that we don’t do what’s written.” I say, “So where do these numbers come from?” He silently points his finger at the ceiling.”
Understanding some background is necessary to realize the importance of the recipients of this letter. The Central Committee of the CPSU, Council of Ministers of the USSR, and the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR had overlapping membership and would have contained practically everyone of serious authority in the Soviet Union.
And since they were, theoretically, supposed to represent every major group, if they approved a course of action there shouldn’t have been any internal forces capable of derailing the plan.
Like spending vast resources on an even more sophisticated version of the Space Shuttle in the waning days of their country just because they couldn’t figure out why the Americans made something so obviously inefficient and thus must have had some secret, nefarious, purpose, and therefore required a Soviet response.
Or spending incredible amounts on weapon systems to counter the mostly paper SDI projects that some smart folks in the Reagan Administration dreamed up. They even launched a demo version of their orbiting laser battlestation. At a time when shortages of consumer goods became the norm...
Naturally, since these projects were done under the tightest secrecy, the common people had difficulty figuring out why the ostensibly mighty Soviet economy with such a huge industrial base couldn’t even keep sausages in stock and so became ever more skeptical.