Smolensky's pdp paper modeled presymbolic processing with the harmonium, the first restricted boltzman machine.
You have a piece of copper and circuitry between your house and your ISP. Back in the day, there was no digital processing. It's just copper, amplifiers, filters, and mechanical switches. Why did dial-up internet never exceed (within a factor of 2) 30 kbps? Because that's the bandwidth of the channel. It's not that modem designers missed a more complicated, neuronal, way to encode the information.
It's really amazing that information and bandwidth can be as fundamental as temperature and mass. There's nothing symbolic about it in that lens. Symbols only come in because we know how to do important computations in the digital domain.
Analog television, FM radio, telegraph lines, telephone lines, smoke signals, the human vocal tract, all of them have bandwidths.
From the wiki page on QAM: "Arbitrarily high spectral efficiencies can be achieved with QAM by setting a suitable constellation size, limited only by the noise level and linearity of the communications channel." [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadrature_amplitude_modulatio...]
You're absolutely right that SNR plays a role. But I don't see why you need to map to symbols.
Dialup internet did exceed 30kbps -- and that's because the bandwidth of the channel (the copper wire) was not the limiter. That's why DSL works and can in theory reach 1 gbps (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_subscriber_line)
I believe it is the channel plus the receiving mechanism plus the sending mechanism plus the encoding mechanism that determine the bandwidth. I am not asserting this, but that is my understanding.
56kbps modems and the like relied on digital telephone lines. I'm not sure where the 30kbps number comes from though - earlier pre-digital modems did go faster than that. Although you could argue those were 'pre-internet' as well...
But the other end of the local copper pair switched and became digital, which changes the channel in my eyes at least. There was then a series of bandwidth increases in the digital realm, giving significantly more efficient and effective use of the channel.
> This bandwidth thing is one of the questions I find frustrating, on par with people wondering if a simulated piece of brain has feelings (the answer is NO). Why is left as an exercise for the reader.
Now this is a hot take.