[Standards-JIG] ACTIVE: JEP-0132 (POKE)
us at die-horde.de
Thu Apr 1 16:02:30 UTC 2004
Craig Kaes wrote:
>I am personally outraged that this JEP was not put through the agreed upon
>process. It is *not* ready for prime time and should never have made it
>through the comment process, much less be championed by a council member.
>(Who did this, btw?)
>My objections are based on:
>1) Descartes' _Second Meditations on First Philosophy_, which makes the
>point that I, as a thinking thing who can question his existence, must
>surely exist *as a thinking thing*. Can I trust my perceptions?
>Resoundingly, *no*. Consequently, a presence probe protocol dependent on
>sensory perception is hopelessly flawed if the attempt is to know the
>presence status of an individual in a true epistemological sense.
>2) Bishop Berkeley claimed that an object cannot exist independently of our
>perceiving it -- meaning that the mere act of probing initiates the very
>perception that makes an individual present when, at the time of initial
>probe, they may or may not have even existed. How can this be accurate?
When speaking of Berkeley and Descarte, you may not forget Sartre, in
"Being and nothingness" he clearly points out that by perceiving it in a
perception one clearly forms the perception and even the perception of
the abscence means it is clearly present.
So, does this mean a probe for presence must always return true?
>I could expect this of Hildy, but how could you, Peter, with your background
>in philosophy have failed to address these points?
>From: Peter Saint-Andre [mailto:stpeter at jabber.org]
>Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 6:37 AM
>To: standards-jig at jabber.org
>Subject: [Standards-JIG] ACTIVE: JEP-0132 (POKE)
>A new JEP has been approved by the Jabber Software Foundation with
>a status of Active:
>JEP-0132: Presence Obtained via Kinesthetic Excitation (POKE)
More information about the Standards