[e2e] About the primitives and their value
touch at ISI.EDU
Thu Aug 10 17:04:11 PDT 2006
David P. Reed wrote:
> Joe Touch wrote:
>> David P. Reed wrote:
>>> Joe Touch wrote:
>>>> If we saw a paradigm that didn't relocate the problem (e.g., as
>>>> publish/subscribe does), sure. I haven't seen one yet. From an
>>>> information theoretic view, I'm not sure it's possible, either, but I'd
>>>> be glad to see suggestions.
>>> May I suggest that information theory is not the relevant way to think
>>> of this? Information theory is good for lots of things, but it doesn't
>>> capture intentionality at all.
>>> Most *applied* information theory results talk loosely about "sending"
>>> and "receiving", but in fact the notion of sending and receiving are
>>> arbitrary elements to which information theory's tools are applied.
>> Let's just say we differ in our opinions on the impact of info theory
>> (and entropy) to this area.
> You can use category theory or information theory or any damn theory you
> like, if you first map your problem into the term of that theory, and
> map the various assumptions you are making into givens in that theory.
> But the mapping you are proposing is not obvious. And the word
> "paradigm" you used earlier is not precise enough to describe a
> relationship between a real system and its formal model.
Sending and receiving are well-defined in info-thy, notably in the way
in which sending increases entropy and receiving decreases it. But maybe
that's either too applied or not enough to match what you're referring to.
> My "opinion" is, I think, the way most mathematicians understand the
> relation between theory and real systems.
Sure - and I agree with that, but I've seen the mapping.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 250 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://mailman.postel.org/pipermail/end2end-interest/attachments/20060810/32502105/signature.bin
More information about the end2end-interest