–——————
我看到OOP 能見的正是DATA ENCAPSULATION，由始至終也沒有GHOST IN THE SHELL，這GHOST只是瑪利奧自己發現自己這BLACK BOX的另一稱呼。
到一天人去看看神經/腦/精神科，看到BLACK BOX內的條目，人生便愈來愈不玄了（卻愈來愈有趣）。因為像BEAUTIFUL LIFE 裏說，THE SICKNESS IS IN YOUR HEAD, 但NASH卻要用自己有病的腦去自我醫治；GHOST的幻像源自自己腦袋，人卻拼命用這充滿幻像的腦袋去了解自己腦袋。
I am not one of those scientist. But if you have a blood test, have your brain scanned in an MRI, they can tell you quite bit about your mental state. You may also need to have to open your childhood history for psychological analysis. You political and economic pofile can also be anaysis by economist and their like to get an estimate of what you will do.
--------------------------------------
If you wish to tell about weather of a particular place (instead of weather in general), you have to at least let the weather scientist collect data on site.
Is that a reasonable request to ask the weatherman to tell you the weather on the spot you are standing, like say, 67 Kei Lung Street (instead of the weather in an area, like, say HK)?
----------------------------------
Why not read a bit on their society and see what they did find before passing judgement?
>Why not read a bit on their society and see what they did find before passing judgement?
Why don't you do?
The brain facts publication they made essentially says "we "began" to understood..." in every paragraph, YES they knew a great deal, does that make a determintal statement about our mind? That would be like saying that Quantum Mechanics is finished.
YES, on day one in Nuclear physics we have nuclear bombs as our first working device, probably also one of the most sophisticated device ever made by humans back then - does it mean that at that point we already know enough of Nuclear physics to speak about a summary or a conclusion of atomic behavior? Well historically it occured some 30-50 years later, maybe not even today as solid state physics still booms like hell.
Maybe I'll think more about making the conclusion of human brain as a mechanical device if one can have all kinds of chips to booster sports skills, math skills, learning ability, additional language packs ... etc.
Here I'm not even saying that one should never make a conclusion about human consciousness, I'm just asking for the abscence of hasty conclusion. After all, we still don't even have a physical definition of that fact that we are receiving stimulus from our own perspectice.
You need a chip in the brain? THere is enough technology as of today to fuse the brain with a chip.
There it is. It can read you mind! You can move a mouse, and click with it. In my school, we have the reverse: You can make a blind man 'see' again with the chip in the brain and a light sensing module in the eyes! http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4396387.stm
Well, it is acually old news. Right now, they are trying to 'record and play' the mind of a monkey (persumably on another monkey)
You know very well that knowing is very different from manipulating. We can know the weather, but controlling the weather is a bit more challenging (although it can be done in a small scale). For the mind issue, we also have a question of morality.
Even if they do know, will the government allow human test subject? Would you volunteer to have your mind altered?
--------------------------
The way I see it is that the study of brain will remain similiar to weather pattern study. For most part, we can only observe. We can only manipulate and control in very small cases/scale.
The way to prove if something is true is NOT by tempering with the weather/mind, but to predict the outcome of a certain condition. For example, under what condition (of the brain) will a person have better self control? (Akin to under what condition is a storm likely?)
2008/9/1 17:32
| 
2008/9/1 17:32
| 
2008/9/2 10:32
| 
