[K0balt]

I explored this argument independently around 2000 and my conclusion was that anything of sufficient complexity can be a representation of anything, given the correct interpretation of the data (a similar argument to the author in this regard).

This seems to imply that every rock (complex body of information) contains infinite consciousnesses, variable by interpretation.

This seems to imply that the interpretation of data is the key element of computation, but that view is confounded by a scenario where a huge flip book contains all of the possible screen presentations of a simulation, and the following page is determined by the choices of the observer. In this case, the computation and the data is arguably both contained within the data, with the act of representation carried out by the act of observation.

This suggests that the act of observation is in fact the critical second component, data and observation with computation being an integral part of one, or the other, rather than a distinct entity at all.

This indeed suggests that computation is not real- ultimately there is only data and observation.

Where that leads us is squarely into the quantum realm, with “wave collapse” due to measurement of information. I’m not sure where we go from there but I thought that was an interesting intersection.