Most personally convincing reasons you don't believe.

[emjay]

I can't quote book, chapter and verse because I don't have the book with me. I moved in with my sister for a while and only took what I really needed so that book is still at home on my bookshelf. Though I guess you'll think that's a lie.

How two dimensional.
We are discussing bias. I am looking for a citation so as to confirm or deny your assessment of bias. your answer is to dig in to your personal interpretation and citing your own potentially bias work. I ask for The name of the book, A chapter and a specific paragraph or verse so I could potentially look it up, and you response is to make me call you a liar or to take you at your word.

You should just drop out of the conversation if you can not provide the citation you are referencing, or at the very least drop the subject.

What you call two dimensional was just me pre-empting what I was expecting to come next given my current paranoid state. Ultimately you don't need a specific citation, you just need to understand how neural networks work, particularly bidirectional neural networks. Not just how they are structured but how they work in practice and the dynamics that emerge... and that takes more than just a cursory glance at the material. That book is all about simulating biological neural networks in software which lets you see these dynamics in action and understand them at a deeper level.

So I don't know what else I can say and given that, yes I would like to drop out of the conversation or the subject, whichever you prefer.

The link does work for me, but if you say it doesn't work for you it's under Philosophy>Seeing Red (thread) post #323

Again refercing your past work is still referencing a potentially biased work, Why would you offer your own thoughts as proof if I am calling your take on said thought into question to begin with?

You said the link didn't work, which implied that you would have read it if it had. So I just gave you a second opportunity to read it.