Brains working towards machine consciousness

 This is my transfer report. I can’t claim to be overly happy with it, but there are constraints on size, and although I haven’t actually exploited them to the full, giving a full treatment of the content of the subject areas would require several times the limit.  This is largely unchanged since the last time it was submitted, with a new section on Digital Identity replacing an old one, now included in the appendices, on bio-acoustic signal analysis. 

I would explore the relationships between different philosophical positions relating to mind, because I think it has a bearing on the system design.  I would explore correlations between models of community, institution and individual in more depth, and extend the role nomenclature in terms of internal 'mind-functions'.  I would look at providing more detail on the abstraction and representation methods I am planning to use - although that would mean I would have to formalise them, which is something I haven't done in the last year mainly due to issues around the administration of the PhD causing me to have no confidence in what stage I am meant to be at, or, indeed, any confidence in my ability to study at this level, and consequently more stress than is strictly necessary.

Even the very minor edits to the last version of the report have taken a long time, mainly because every time I have had to engage with it, I have felt a strong sense of sadness and anger.  Essentially, having been re-registered on a new Higher Degree without my knowledge or consent, after changing supervisors, starting October 2007, I was told I had to transfer in January 2008.  When I went through the process, the only feedback I got for 6 months afterwards was that I had tried transferring too early, but everybody thought I was a capable researcher.  

Eventually, when I managed to get written feedback (after having been denied it on a couple of occasions), it consisted of a form which was post-dated, and which looked a lot like it had been written the day before, which said that essentially the format of the report was wrong.  I know one of my supervisors had pointed out that 'too early' wasn't grounds for failing a transfer, so I suspect this had something to do with that.  Coupled with the format being the same as most other transfer reports I had seen, I have to say I was not wildly happy about the assessment.  I was strongly advised that raising an official complaint about the way my transfer had been handled would be 'career limiting'.  Blogging about it would probably be deemed such as well, but frankly, there has to be some outlet available, and I almost past caring.

Things didn't get any better, it has to be said, and no apology or reasonable explanation from those who had made the assessment was forthcoming.  For the last two years it has been very hard to get any work done on the PhD - chiefly because of the extreme sense of injustice.  In my opinion, I should have had my registration suspended; perhaps that is still a possibility.  

So now I am in the situation where a largely unchanged transfer report is going to be assessed.  If it fails, so be it - although I would argue it still only represents about 6 months work.  If it fails on the basis of not being adequate for 6 months work, I will be a little surprised (to say the least, having seen some other transfer reports).  If it fails on the basis of being 2 years work, I will have to object as I should have had the suspension I asked for.  If it passes, I will be absolutely outraged that it was deemed to have failed the last time around.  It is a no-win situation, frankly, and that is why it has taken a long time to make the minor adjustments necessary.