RE: virus: Nature of Information

Dave K-P (
Tue, 14 Oct 1997 00:54:41 -0400

At 03:59 AM 10/14/97 +0100, Robin Faichney wrote:

>I don't agree. Why do you say translation is no less
>fundamental? I looks a great deal less so to me. As
>I already said, definitions are better simple. You do
>not generally define something by listing all the things
>you can do with it.

Perhaps I read you wrong, but didn't you write "'pattern' is that which
allows for compression" ? I did not infer that you were attempting to
define it, so I tacked on translation, too. Sorry for this fruitless
sidetrack. I am curious, though, as to why you perceive translation as
"less fundamental" than compression?

>Yes, I said that, and yes, it expresses a certain sort
>of relativity, but so what? What are you trying to
>say here?

I was not-so-simply agreeing with you, I guess.

>If you think that information requires symbols you haven't
>grasped what's going on here.

Granted, "symbols" was the completely wrong choice of word. Will "things"
suffice for now? Like I said, this is a theory-in-the-making :-)