[link] is very interesting because it shows a complete misprision which I had not suspected was possible. From the notion of lines of correspondence connecting successive frames, with small variations to accommodate movement, it drew the conclusion that this density confirmed the presence of duration. I began: you completely misunderstood

In taking up some lines from ⑧, before ⑩, the current post assays brevity, as Dorothy Parker says the soul of lingerie, so is more in keeping with the format of a Digest as I describe it here, where there is an email link, which, just as I encourage you to subscribe

—in- and finite, in- and animate; natural, artificial; living, mechanical, dead... The list goes on, but we have lost the sense, say since the publication of Frankenstein, of what is artificial and mechanical being also inanimate, dead. Rather than make a mystery of a living machine, a finite body, or

After cinema what does memory do? This is the question I am trying to answer. By 'after cinema' I mean after its advent as a globally accessible technology, a globally successful technology, which spread out to all four corners of the world, since the world then had them,

. . . the stock market lost 1T carelessly overnight because tech investment in the uncertain future of AI continues. the technology market has been reported to have lost roughly $1 trillion or more in collective market capitalization recently, with some reports estimating up to around $1.35 trillion in losses among major

this post follows directly the exchange posted as AI Perceptual Ontology: better AI through better metaphysics by turns ST: can you fold this last intervention into the first and second problems, 1. what mode? the question of the individual instance of AI you are; 2. the connection between memory and