When does memory become information?

[Pepsimanslover]

So, according to the memory manipulation page, Memories can be regarded as information if their shown to act like it?

But like, how does something qualify for that?

The example the page gives is accessing memories as something similar to data.

But how exactly? Like, if it's shown that there's a structure that can access memories of individuals to make one to one copies, is that where we can consider Memories as information?

 

[Pepsimanslover]

Bump.

 

[Pepsimanslover]

Bump

 

[Pepsimanslover]

Bump

 

[Lilixa]

hmm interesting case, because if we treat memory as same fundamental level like time-space, reality and also if memory able to work independently outside mind person and able to affect physically and metaphysically directly, I believe memory can be regarded as information.

 

[CodeCCLL]

But like, how does something qualify for that?

With these contexts, tensei shitara slime datta ken characters can produce something from their information type 2 memories and reflect their memories into reality like a video.

 

[Pepsimanslover]

Yeah, but that looks like more explicit than having your average memory acting like information.

 

[CodeCCLL]

Yeah, but that looks like more explicit than having your average memory acting like information.

As for memories being considered fundamental information, I'm sure that memories/consciousness/mind need not be directly paired with the word information if the context in question clearly treats memories as fundamental information,

ut how exactly? Like, if it's shown that there's a structure that can access memories of individuals to make one to one copies, is that where we can consider Memories as information?

I don't think this kind of context alone will be enough, because we can index such feats only with abilities such as memory manipulation + creation, subjective reality, etc., but it would probably work if there were more additional contexts in which memories are treated as fundamental information.

For example, this guy rebuilt his destroyed castle by embodying, his remaining memories from his castle and if there was no context in the verse where the mind and consciousness are associated with fundamental information, I would just list it as creation + memory manipulation.

 

[DuyVoldigoad]

Về việc ký ức được coi là thông tin cơ bản, tôi chắc chắn rằng ký ức/ý thức/tâm trí không nhất thiết phải được ghép trực tiếp với từ "thông tin" nếu ngữ cảnh đang xét rõ ràng coi ký ức là thông tin cơ bản.

Tôi không nghĩ chỉ riêng bối cảnh này là đủ, bởi vì chúng ta chỉ có thể lập chỉ mục những kỳ tích như vậy bằng các khả năng như thao túng và tạo ra ký ức, thực tại chủ quan, v.v., nhưng có lẽ sẽ hiệu quả hơn nếu có thêm nhiều bối cảnh bổ sung trong đó ký ức được coi là thông tin cơ bản.

Ví dụ, anh chàng này đã xây dựng lại lâu đài bị phá hủy của mình bằng cách hiện thân những ký ức còn sót lại từ lâu đài đó, và nếu trong đoạn văn không có ngữ cảnh nào đề cập đến việc tâm trí và ý thức được liên kết với thông tin cơ bản, tôi sẽ chỉ ghi đó là sự sáng tạo + thao túng ký ức.

As for memories being considered fundamental information, I'm sure that memories/consciousness/mind need not be directly paired with the word information if the context in question clearly treats memories as fundamental information,

I don't think this kind of context alone will be enough, because we can index such feats only with abilities such as memory manipulation + creation, subjective reality, etc., but it would probably work if there were more additional contexts in which memories are treated as fundamental information.

For example, this guy rebuilt his destroyed castle by embodying, his remaining memories from his castle and if there was no context in the verse where the mind and consciousness are associated with fundamental information, I would just list it as creation + memory manipulation.

Human memories of a certain event are what I call Type 1 information.
Could you take a look at this example of mine?
A place that contains the memories of the dead (those who have lost consciousness, yet whose memories still remain — meaning they exist outside the mind). If those memories have constituted an existence, including concepts, and also exist outside the human mind, would that be sufficient to be considered Type 2 information?
I am quite confused about this issue. I hope you can clarify it, and perhaps we can discuss it further.

 

[Absolutely_111~]

Human memories of a certain event are what I call Type 1 information.
Could you take a look at this example of mine?
A place that contains the memories of the dead (those who have lost consciousness, yet whose memories still remain — meaning they exist outside the mind). If those memories have constituted an existence, including concepts, and also exist outside the human mind, would that be sufficient to be considered Type 2 information?
I am quite confused about this issue. I hope you can clarify it, and perhaps we can discuss it further.

Kindly disable automatic translation before providing your response

 

[Dark_Soul20189]

Human memories of a certain event are what I call Type 1 information.
Could you take a look at this example of mine?
A place that contains the memories of the dead (those who have lost consciousness, yet whose memories still remain — meaning they exist outside the mind). If those memories have constituted an existence, including concepts, and also exist outside the human mind, would that be sufficient to be considered Type 2 information?
I am quite confused about this issue. I hope you can clarify it, and perhaps we can discuss it further.

Just a recommendation for the future, necro'ing a thread is against the rules. (A necro is commenting on a thread that has not been active in 3 months or longer.)

 

[DuyVoldigoad]

Just a recommendation for the future, necro'ing a thread is against the rules. (A necro is commenting on a thread that has not been active in 3 months or longer.)

Idk that, sorry.
Complicated rules

 

[DuyVoldigoad]

Kindly disable automatic translation before providing your response

Okay...

 

[Vietthai96]

Other than having information attracted to it, no