GrahamH wrote:

DavidMcC wrote:I'm abandoning this thread, because there is too much ignorance-based sarcasm from certain posters, who seem to think humans are really, really special. There is simply no arguing with such people.

Do you mean this dedication to the idea that humans have something unique in nature called "free will"?
If you are suggesting humans aren't that special and are very much part of the natural world then I agree with you.

Of course I agree that humans are part of the natural world, that's what I have been talking about throughout this thread, but I thought I had also made it clear that the evolution of the social primates created the conditions for FW (based on the primate brain) to be expressed - ie sometimes not be "buried" under learned habits and instincts, because there is sometimes time to think (as when scheming to become the alpha male), because of the social primates' lifestyle.

PS, Graham, why do you think we would need a high-tech brain insert to realise and correct an error of memory?

DavidMcC wrote:PS, Graham, why do you think we would need a high-tech brain insert to realise and correct an error of memory?

What do you mean?

GrahamH wrote:In what respects would you say that wolves (as an example of non-primate social mammals) do not have a moral code, while chimps (as an example of social primates) do have a moral code? Both species operate in groups, with a clear hierarchy.

Where did I say that ONLY social primates have moral codes? I was only giving the social primates as an EXAMPLE where there is the strongest evidence that I KNOW OF of it. You often read things into my posts that I did not say.

GrahamH wrote:

DavidMcC wrote:PS, Graham, why do you think we would need a high-tech brain insert to realise and correct an error of memory?

What do you mean?

That was a reference to one of your sarcastic remarks - one that appears to have been subsequently deleted, as far as I can tell now.

Graham, it has just occurred to me that your recent "sarcastic" post may heave been the work of a certain former mod, who somehow retained mod powers after resigning as mod. Several other posts over the last year have been tampered with, then altered back again in that way. He also covers his tracks, by deleting the editing history! It is only when I neglect to quote the post I am replying to that he does this, for obvious reasons, and this was one of those occasions.
The problem is that I cannot gather evidence implicating anyone in particular, though I have my suspicions, obviously.

I have no idea what you are on about David.

You have attributed one of zoon's posts to me:

zoon wrote:
...
In what respects would you say that wolves (as an example of non-primate social mammals) do not have a moral code, while chimps (as an example of social primates) do have a moral code? Both species operate in groups, with a clear hierarchy.

DavidMcC wrote:

GrahamH (er, zoon#2148) wrote:In what respects would you say that wolves (as an example of non-primate social mammals) do not have a moral code, while chimps (as an example of social primates) do have a moral code? Both species operate in groups, with a clear hierarchy.

Where did I say that ONLY social primates have moral codes? I was only giving the social primates as an EXAMPLE where there is the strongest evidence that I KNOW OF of it. You often read things into my posts that I did not say.

GrahamH isn’t to be accused of that one, it was my post #2148, which doesn’t seem to have been moved by any rogue mods so far. I gather we are in agreement that there is a continuum of behaviour which is similar to aspects of human moral behaviour in different animal species, with the primates, especially chimps and bonobos, being most like us? Is it your view that free will likewise appears gradually, something that reptiles have less of and mammals have more of, rather than an all or nothing matter?

zoon wrote:

DavidMcC wrote:

GrahamH (er, zoon#2148) wrote:In what respects would you say that wolves (as an example of non-primate social mammals) do not have a moral code, while chimps (as an example of social primates) do have a moral code? Both species operate in groups, with a clear hierarchy.

Where did I say that ONLY social primates have moral codes? I was only giving the social primates as an EXAMPLE where there is the strongest evidence that I KNOW OF of it. You often read things into my posts that I did not say.

GrahamH isn’t to be accused of that one, it was my post #2148, which doesn’t seem to have been moved by any rogue mods so far. I gather we are in agreement that there is a continuum of behaviour which is similar to aspects of human moral behaviour in different animal species, with the primates, especially chimps and bonobos, being most like us? Is it your view that free will likewise appears gradually, something that reptiles have less of and mammals have more of, rather than an all or nothing matter?

No, that was not the post. It was definitely one of Graham's that got altered to "raise the temperature".

GrahamH wrote:I have no idea what you are on about David.
...

I wouldn't expect you to, unless you are in the habit of constantly re-reading all your recent posts to check for unauthorised, temporary alterations...

zoon wrote:

DavidMcC wrote:

GrahamH (er, zoon#2148) wrote:In what respects would you say that wolves (as an example of non-primate social mammals) do not have a moral code, while chimps (as an example of social primates) do have a moral code? Both species operate in groups, with a clear hierarchy.

Where did I say that ONLY social primates have moral codes? I was only giving the social primates as an EXAMPLE where there is the strongest evidence that I KNOW OF of it. You often read things into my posts that I did not say.

GrahamH isn’t to be accused of that one,...
...

I wasn't accusing him of anything. It would not have been his fault if someone else changes his post.

DavidMcC wrote:

GrahamH wrote:I have no idea what you are on about David.
...

I wouldn't expect you to, unless you are in the habit of constantly re-reading all your recent posts to check for unauthorised, temporary alterations...

I don't think you are ready to be fitted with a tinfoil hat, David, but you have made this sort of accusation before with me, and I think with others, when you could not locate some text that you thought you were responding to.

I also don't suggest you need to see a neurologist about the possibility of early-onset Alzheimer's, because I don't think your problem lies there, either. I think you have an unshakeable commitment to winning arguments on the internet, but that just renders your discourse monologic, which is a common enough affliction, and so not a sign of abnormality.

DavidMcC wrote:I'm abandoning this thread, because there is too much ignorance-based sarcasm from certain posters, who seem to think humans are really, really special. There is simply no arguing with such people.

Cito di Pense wrote:I don't think you are ready to be fitted with a tinfoil hat, David, but you have made this sort of accusation before with me...

NO, I DAMNED WELL HAVEN'T, not with your posts. I don't know wtf your talking about. Nor, I suspect, do you.
PS, I thought tinfoil hats were related to woo, not paranoia about meddling mods, so you're not even making an appropriate wrong accusation.

PPS, your posts are often absurd enough even without someo\ne else spicing them up!

DavidMcC wrote:

Cito di Pense wrote:I don't think you are ready to be fitted with a tinfoil hat, David, but you have made this sort of accusation before with me...

NO, I DAMNED WELL HAVEN'T, not with your posts. I don't know wtf your talking about. Nor, I suspect, do you.
PS, I thought tinfoil hats were related to woo, not paranoia about meddling mods, so you're not even making an appropriate wrong accusation.

PPS, your posts are often absurd enough even without someo\ne else spicing them up!

Why don't you just ponder this exchange and try to explain why this shit happens to you in the threads you're in.

I think it kind of goes along with your resistance to including the post-link tags in your quotes of other people's posts.

Cito talking to his own agenda, as ever.

Also, in the case in point, I can't find the relevant old post, because the key parts have been edited out by someone, and Graham denies being the editor, and I believe him.

EDIT: I'm setting you back to "ignore" again. Maybe permanently, as there is no value in this conversation, just your opinions.

DavidMcC wrote:Cito talking to his own agenda, as ever.

Also, in the case in point, I can't find the relevant old post, because the key parts have been edited out by someone, and Graham denies being the editor, and I believe him.

Graham said he doesn't know what you're referring to. As far as I know, the only people who can edit the threads, in the way you're suggesting, are the current mods - and I can't imagine why they would want to arbitrarily remove segments of Graham's posts like that. Is it not possible that you're simply mistaken?

Since the alledgedly sarcastic post has not been identified in any way I can't say much about this.

I don't deny being the editor, I don't know what David is on about. Was the post David vaguely recalls posted by me? (David has wrongly attributed posts) Was it sarcastic? Who can say?

GrahamH wrote:Since the alledgedly sarcastic post has not been identified in any way I can't say much about this.

I don't deny being the editor, I don't know what David is on about. Was the post David vaguely recalls posted by me? (David has wrongly attributed posts) Was it sarcastic? Who can say?

Please understand what I am saying - that you made a certain post, and edited it, without using silly language, but before I got to read it, a certain fomer mod who retained editorial powers over both your and my posts, altered your post (without your knowledge) to make it inflammatory. (He probably only does it with posts that have anyhow been edited validly.) After I had seen it, the same rogue altered it back again, and deleted the associated edit history. The same rogue had previously boasted on this site of doing such things on another site (probably with similar software), but the thread in which that occurred was subsequently deleted. Thus, you would have known nothing of this! Similar things have happened with others, months ago, and I should perhaps have raised the issue with the mods, but did not think it serious enough at the time. Now, I'm not so sure, because it could pop up again and again if nothing is done. In the meantime, I will make my own records of seemingly out-of-character posts, to see if the on-line version changes.Then we can establish whether there is interference by third parties.
Also, as I have already said to Cito, this has absolutely nothing to do with my very occasional typing errors leading to wrong attribution of posts (which has absolutely nothing to do with inflammatory language within posts). I am sorry if you are still confused about this.

DavidMcC wrote:

GrahamH wrote:Since the alledgedly sarcastic post has not been identified in any way I can't say much about this.

I don't deny being the editor, I don't know what David is on about. Was the post David vaguely recalls posted by me? (David has wrongly attributed posts) Was it sarcastic? Who can say?

Please understand what I am saying - that you made a certain post, and edited it, without using silly language, but before I got to read it, a certain fomer mod who retained editorial powers over both your and my posts, altered your post (without your knowledge) to make it inflammatory. (He probably only does it with posts that have anyhow been edited validly.) After I had seen it, the same rogue altered it back again, and deleted the associated edit history. The same rogue had previously boasted on this site of doing such things on another site (probably with similar software), but the thread in which that occurred was subsequently deleted. Thus, you would have known nothing of this! Similar things have happened with others, months ago, and I should perhaps have raised the issue with the mods, but did not think it serious enough at the time. Now, I'm not so sure, because it could pop up again and again if nothing is done. In the meantime, I will make my own records of seemingly out-of-character posts, to see if the on-line version changes.Then we can establish whether there is interference by third parties.
Also, as I have already said to Cito, this has absolutely nothing to do with my very occasional typing errors leading to wrong attribution of posts (which has absolutely nothing to do with inflammatory language within posts). I am sorry if you are still confused about this.

DavidMcC wrote:Also, in the case in point, I can't find the relevant old post, because the key parts have been edited out by someone, and Graham denies being the editor, and I believe him.

I was making it clear that I do not "deny being the editor", as you stated. How could I deny editing an unidentified post?

GrahamH wrote:

DavidMcC wrote:

GrahamH wrote:Since the alledgedly sarcastic post has not been identified in any way I can't say much about this.

I don't deny being the editor, I don't know what David is on about. Was the post David vaguely recalls posted by me? (David has wrongly attributed posts) Was it sarcastic? Who can say?

Please understand what I am saying - that you made a certain post, and edited it, without using silly language, but before I got to read it, a certain fomer mod who retained editorial powers over both your and my posts, altered your post (without your knowledge) to make it inflammatory. (He probably only does it with posts that have anyhow been edited validly.) After I had seen it, the same rogue altered it back again, and deleted the associated edit history. The same rogue had previously boasted on this site of doing such things on another site (probably with similar software), but the thread in which that occurred was subsequently deleted. Thus, you would have known nothing of this! Similar things have happened with others, months ago, and I should perhaps have raised the issue with the mods, but did not think it serious enough at the time. Now, I'm not so sure, because it could pop up again and again if nothing is done. In the meantime, I will make my own records of seemingly out-of-character posts, to see if the on-line version changes.Then we can establish whether there is interference by third parties.
Also, as I have already said to Cito, this has absolutely nothing to do with my very occasional typing errors leading to wrong attribution of posts (which has absolutely nothing to do with inflammatory language within posts). I am sorry if you are still confused about this.

DavidMcC wrote:Also, in the case in point, I can't find the relevant old post, because the key parts have been edited out by someone, and Graham denies being the editor, and I believe him.

I was making it clear that I do not "deny being the editor", as you stated. How could I deny editing an unidentified post?

But I thought you were innocent of using inflammatory, sarcastic language, because you asked "What do you mean?" when I accused you of implying that some kind of patented high-tech brain implant is required to achieve a simple feat of delayed memory. Obviously, until then, I assumed that it was indeed you editing the offending words out, then pretending that you hadn't used them. However, I then remembered other cases, involving other posters, months ago. (Again, the evidence has been deleted from the site.)
If, on the other hand, you are saying that you did, indeed, post sarcastically, then edit the sarcasm out, then it was, after all, your fault, not a rogue mod. I just didn't think that you would do that.

DavidMcC wrote:

GrahamH wrote:

DavidMcC wrote:

GrahamH wrote:Since the alledgedly sarcastic post has not been identified in any way I can't say much about this.

I don't deny being the editor, I don't know what David is on about. Was the post David vaguely recalls posted by me? (David has wrongly attributed posts) Was it sarcastic? Who can say?

Please understand what I am saying - that you made a certain post, and edited it, without using silly language, but before I got to read it, a certain fomer mod who retained editorial powers over both your and my posts, altered your post (without your knowledge) to make it inflammatory. (He probably only does it with posts that have anyhow been edited validly.) After I had seen it, the same rogue altered it back again, and deleted the associated edit history. The same rogue had previously boasted on this site of doing such things on another site (probably with similar software), but the thread in which that occurred was subsequently deleted. Thus, you would have known nothing of this! Similar things have happened with others, months ago, and I should perhaps have raised the issue with the mods, but did not think it serious enough at the time. Now, I'm not so sure, because it could pop up again and again if nothing is done. In the meantime, I will make my own records of seemingly out-of-character posts, to see if the on-line version changes.Then we can establish whether there is interference by third parties.
Also, as I have already said to Cito, this has absolutely nothing to do with my very occasional typing errors leading to wrong attribution of posts (which has absolutely nothing to do with inflammatory language within posts). I am sorry if you are still confused about this.

DavidMcC wrote:Also, in the case in point, I can't find the relevant old post, because the key parts have been edited out by someone, and Graham denies being the editor, and I believe him.

I was making it clear that I do not "deny being the editor", as you stated. How could I deny editing an unidentified post?

But I thought you were innocent of using inflammatory, sarcastic language, because you asked "What do you mean?" when I accused you of implying that some kind of patented high-tech brain implant is required to achieve a simple feat of delayed memory. Obviously, until then, I assumed that it was indeed you editing the offending words out, then pretending that you hadn't used them. However, I then remembered other cases, involving other posters, months ago. (Again, the evidence has been deleted from the site.)
If, on the other hand, you are saying that you did, indeed, post sarcastically, then edit the sarcasm out, then it was, after all, your fault, not a rogue mod. I just didn't think that you would do that.

What comment, what sarcasm? When I replied "what do you mean" I meant it!

Could you be thinking of this post, that does mention something related to your comments on delayed memory?

GrahamH wrote:It might be that the risks of neural interfaces are considered too vulnerable to abuse to be allowed, but people might want to have them for ostensibly non-abusive reasons. It could be that having an AI companion in your head that knows you better than you know yourself, and brings access to unprecedented resources, could be desired by many. It would probably be the abusive uses of the technology that would be illegal or otherwise restricted, rather than the technology itself.
Google invades our privacy, tracks our preferences and influences our decisions. We are "free" not to use google (or any search engine) but most of us want to use it.

David's last minute will-altering memory pop-up could be an Adwords-sponsored pop-up from your NeuroSiri implant reminding you that a restaurant you "liked" once is just round the corner and you don't receive your grocery shipment at home untill tomorrow. Is it your free will to eat out tonight? If the same thoughts popped into your head without Siri is that free will?
Changing your mind might never have been so easy.