Re: virus: MS Weapon

Sodom (
Thu, 09 Oct 1997 21:50:30 -0400

Richard Brodie wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 8, 1997 1:49 AM, Robin Faichney
> [] wrote:
> > Your question *might* make sense if I had been talking about
> > *absolutely* all patterns, but in fact it was all "these patterns
> > people see". Say two people look at a photograph of a cloud,
> > and one sees a similarity to a sheep, while the other is
> > reminded of the Mandelbrot set. A pattern-matching algorithm,
> > set up to compare scanned-in photos of the cloud and of a
> > sheep in the appropriate position WRIT viewpoint, with the
> > M set, will find and match these patterns, because all are
> > really there.
> No, your program will find and match those patterns because you have
> programmed it to do so. Hofstadter has done much research on patterns. Have
> you read his latest "Fluid Concepts and Creative Analogies"? It's
> interesting. I'd say the fact that patterns AREN'T inherent in reality is
> the reason such programming is so difficult.
> Richard Brodie
> Author, VIRUS OF THE MIND: The New Science of the Meme
> Visit Meme Central:

I'm not as well read about patterns as either of you guys seem to be,
but I think that the concept of "pattern" is a human/symbolic one. I
would speculate that the mind builds patterns to help with comprehension
and thereby defeat fear. I was also suggest that to realize a pattern,
sentience is necessary. A computer can recognize what a human considers
a pattern if taught to. I do not think any patterns exist in reality,
only in our own reality. This is not to say that complex systems, or
simple ones for that matter, don't seem to follow a pattern, but
seemingly obeying physics is different than a pattern. In fact, I would
guess that the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle alone would rule out
patterns as random sampling subject to subjective observation.