Information and Meaning
-
EvoTARDs are such a clueless lot- I blame it on Shannon and others for causing confusion over the word "information". Now evoTARDs have taken that confusion to a new level by saying IDists confuse information with meaning.
Hellooooo!!! Information and meaning go hand in hand 99% of the time. Only physicists and Shannonites don't get what information means. For example:
Is what Weaver said so difficult to understand?
Kolmogorov complexity deals with, well, complexity. From wikipedia:
Nothing about meaning, content, functionality, prescription. IOW nothing that Information Technology cares deeply about, namely functional, meaningful, and useful information. Not only Information Technology but the whole world depends on Information Technology type of information, ie the type of information Intelligent Design is concerned with.
And both Creationists and IDists make it clear, painfully clear, that when we are discussing "information" we are discussing that type of information.
And without even blinking an eye, the anti-IDists always, and without fail, bring up the meaningless when trying to refute the meaningful. “Look there is nature producing Shannon Information, you lose!”- ho-hum.
Pathetic little losers can't grasp the concept of information even though without it communication would be impossible and information technology wouldn't exist.
What does wikipedia have to say about information:
And in an article on Data
EvoTARDs are such a clueless lot- I blame it on Shannon and others for causing confusion over the word "information". Now evoTARDs have taken that confusion to a new level by saying IDists confuse information with meaning.
Hellooooo!!! Information and meaning go hand in hand 99% of the time. Only physicists and Shannonites don't get what information means. For example:
The word information in this theory is used in a special mathematical sense that must not be confused with its ordinary usage. In particular, information must not be confused with meaning.- Warren Weaver, one of Shannon's collaboratorsThat means Shannon was the one who "redefined" information and IDists use the word in its normal/ regular/ ordinary sense.
Is what Weaver said so difficult to understand?
Kolmogorov complexity deals with, well, complexity. From wikipedia:
Algorithmic information theory principally studies complexity measures on strings (or other data structures).
Nothing about meaning, content, functionality, prescription. IOW nothing that Information Technology cares deeply about, namely functional, meaningful, and useful information. Not only Information Technology but the whole world depends on Information Technology type of information, ie the type of information Intelligent Design is concerned with.
And both Creationists and IDists make it clear, painfully clear, that when we are discussing "information" we are discussing that type of information.
And without even blinking an eye, the anti-IDists always, and without fail, bring up the meaningless when trying to refute the meaningful. “Look there is nature producing Shannon Information, you lose!”- ho-hum.
Pathetic little losers can't grasp the concept of information even though without it communication would be impossible and information technology wouldn't exist.
What does wikipedia have to say about information:
Information, in its most restricted technical sense, is a sequence of symbols that can be interpreted as a message. Information can be recorded as signs, or transmitted as signals. Information is any kind of event that affects the state of a dynamic system. Conceptually, information is the message (utterance or expression) being conveyed. The meaning of this concept varies in different contexts.[1] Moreover, the concept of information is closely related to notions of constraint, communication, control, data, form, instruction, knowledge, meaning, understanding, mental stimuli, pattern, perception, representation, and entropyOoops, they use the "m" word in realtion to information.
And in an article on Data
For data to become information, it must be interpreted and take on a meaning.Oh no, who would have thought!
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home