zeca

im not saying i agree with this interpretation. just that the meme reinforces an erroneous causal relation depending on the bias of the reader. im dont know these places very well, but im used to seeing govenrments treating lower class neighborhoods with less attention. its a common perception.

This is exactly what puzzles me. Or at least you seem to be talking about what puzzles me. The problem is that when I mention this to others, most missunderstand what I mean by “being aware” or “conscious”, and im not sure its possible to refer to this phenomena in a much better way. But that is exactly the argument i usually make, that an automata could behave exactly like me, following the supposed physical laws, but without being aware, or having any sensation, without seeing the images, hearing the sounds, only processing sensorial data. Processing sensorial data isnt the same as feeling/hearing/seeing it.

whats american about this?, i dont get it. not america btw

I feel like dogs tend to to give us the benefit of the doubt about everything, never jump to thinking we’re crazy.

it may be an honest question, but surely a stoopid question.

well, i simply dont agree that googles worth comes down to the work of those two people. what they did may have been necessary for the success of google, but so was the work of a lot of their employees.

again, the www is founded on the work of uncountably many people. the person credited is usually the one at the end of the chain of production. the end of the chain is necessary for there to be a product at all, but each of the other nodes of the chain is equally as important.

looking at these is disturbing me a little

I see, so you see it not an actual state we may achieve, but rather the negation of present authorities and systems.

excuse my ignorance, but ive always wondered this about anarchism: Seems to me that people gather and organize themselves to reach common goals. How can these organizations not become governments? is that actually possible?

Its a definition, but not an effective one in the sense that we can test and recognize it. Can we list all cognitive tasks a human can do? To avoid testing a probably infinite list, we should instead understand what are the basic cognitive abilities of humans that compose all other cognitive abilities we have, if thats even possible. Like the equivalent of a turing machine, but for human cognition. The Turing machine is based on a finite list of mechanisms and it is considered as the ultimate computer (in the classical sense of computing, but with potentially infinite memory). But we know too little about whether the limits of the turing machine are also limits of human cognition.