He's making sites from scratch without programming because HTML isn't programming
this is just not true
any time you use code to write computer instructions it is "programming"
he uses CMSMS, which means he only codes part of the site "by hand"
internet coding is not complex compared to coding a first-person-shooter, but the demands of the individual coder are different
i've seen many coders spend 10 minutes writing some executable code then spend an hour figuring out how to get it to go where they want in the HTML page on a website to look right
is a computer that has been programmed by a human with parameters and a system specifically made by humans for it to take defined variables and combine them in pre-programmed parameters
all pounded out by a dumb monkey
'teh singularity' is a tautology
you can't make a new thing by calling the same thing a different name
we haven't managed to make machines until now that are smart at all. Artificial intelligence isn't synthetic intelligence: It's pseudo-intelligence. This really ought to be obvious. Clocks may keep time, but they don't know what time it is.
so glad to see published articles where they say this plainly
'teh singluarity' needs to go to the dustbin of history b/c it's wasting *billions* of research dollars
the problem is that the people with money don't know the difference between a *good* tech innovation and *bullshit* marketing gussied up as tech innovation
the problem is ignorance of the decision makers, not our ideas
there are plenty of good ideas to be had floating in the ether...
these extreme trolls are complex enough that they might mean something
i wonder what organization (and their PR wing) would be pissed that Slashdot published this story
it could be that if they can't keep it from being published then they systematically subvert it by putting racist/homophobic stuff as first post to make it obnoixious
The Turing and Computability Function paradigm for computing is (finally) being rightly and fully criticized (ironically, as we get a Turing hollywood movie)
Ada Lovelace's theories ***do indeed*** provide the theoretical ground work (along with others like Claude Shannon) to cleans ourselves of Turing Test nonsense
However...this test...in TFA is not the test.
It's just a variation on the Turing test that still has the same tautology...it's a test of fooling a human in an artificial, one time only environment...which has nothing to do with actual computing
We need to stop pretending we can make a machine that thinks like we do...
It's a tautology and a waste of resources.
Machines follow the instructions we give them via code. End.
Slashdot Mirror
does it have something to do with the fact that the word 'suite' is used in both programming and in classical music?
the name actually matters
you base all kinds of choices based on product names...
the name is part of the design...when you don't have any other information, design choices can indicate quality
is Vivaldi intended for a small group of developers only? no? you want non-developers to use it?
the name is not some completely abstract factor
c'mon guys...we *have* to start coming up with better names for products...
"Vivaldi"
sounds like a lesser composer from Mozart's time
or a corrupt Roman proconsul in the early CE
vivaldi could definitely be the name of a new blood thinner drug from Pfizer
damn it...seriously....'vivaldi'
don't tell me what it means b/c i don't care and neither does anyone else...it's a Dumb Name
it's broad enough to say you're "programming" the ATM every time you get cash from it.
i have to take objection to this
*using* a machine and *programing* a machine are different
you're forgetting the user/programmer dichotomy
the programmer designs the system and the user is basically passive in that the programmer of the system defines the user's universe of options
So, Wirth's definition, and your changes can define 'programming' and it won't disagree with my definition.
Wirth is trying to provide an *academic* definition that is *all-inclusive* in it's language
My definition is the reverse...it seeks to simplify what's happening to the most essential.
I'm right. All programming involves controlling machines using symbols.
It's the best definition, and it doesn't disagree with Wirth's definition
you are taking it too far
the difference is characters (aka symbols) stored in memory...not the act of 'print'ing a character on screen
it fully makes logical sense...you write code, store it in memory, computer executes it...the symbols you use are the 'langauge'
there are many people who claim to be 'coders' or 'programmers' who are not, but we can't let that determine how we talk/define this stuff
this really is the best way to understand programming
look...it depends on how you define 'programming'
I'm using a definition that is consistent and logical, but isn't as exclusive as the pedantic definitions many use.
programming is using symbols to control the behavior of a computer...
maybe this will help...it can be 'programming' even if the symbols you use aren't a full 'programming language' in the proper sense
It depends on how you define 'programming'
I'm using a definition that is consistent and logical, but isn't as exclusive as the pedantic definitions many use.
programming is using symbols to control the behavior of a computer...
maybe this will help...it can be 'programming' even if the symbols you use aren't a full 'programming language' in the proper sense
this is just not true
any time you use code to write computer instructions it is "programming"
he uses CMSMS, which means he only codes part of the site "by hand"
internet coding is not complex compared to coding a first-person-shooter, but the demands of the individual coder are different
i've seen many coders spend 10 minutes writing some executable code then spend an hour figuring out how to get it to go where they want in the HTML page on a website to look right
great work, Airstrip One...
seriously...compare France and England...England is practically Saudi Arabia...a really high culture progressive Saudi Arabia.
France did the sensible thing and rejected their monarchs & organized religion long ago.
Yet I cannot deny some things about UK culture are priceless...I really just don't understand why England doesn't ditch their monarchs completely.
'means very little'
unless...you want to actually build the thing
that's the problem with "teh singularity" types...NONE OF THEM ARE CODERS...
all machine behavior is determined by human coders...absolutely nothing you can say changes this fact
YOUR ARGUMENT IS IRRATIONAL
"a computer that can program itself"
is a computer that has been programmed by a human with parameters and a system specifically made by humans for it to take defined variables and combine them in pre-programmed parameters
all pounded out by a dumb monkey
'teh singularity' is a tautology
you can't make a new thing by calling the same thing a different name
all of which are, as TFA says, not 'intelligence' at all!
so glad to see published articles where they say this plainly
'teh singluarity' needs to go to the dustbin of history b/c it's wasting *billions* of research dollars
almost 10 years isn't a 'noob' on any internet forum
says the user with a 7-digit UID
you have no idea what the "core /. membership" is like because you have just started commenting
the problem is the decision makers - not the ideas
being in charge means *deciding between options*
we have to blame the business people here
the problem is that the people with money don't know the difference between a *good* tech innovation and *bullshit* marketing gussied up as tech innovation
the problem is ignorance of the decision makers, not our ideas
there are plenty of good ideas to be had floating in the ether...
these extreme trolls are complex enough that they might mean something
i wonder what organization (and their PR wing) would be pissed that Slashdot published this story
it could be that if they can't keep it from being published then they systematically subvert it by putting racist/homophobic stuff as first post to make it obnoixious
in other words, sockpuppet griefers
There are many criticisms of the Turing test...from many angles.
You address none of them, you just simply stated the negative.
That's the problem...supporting the Turing paradigm means constantly avoiding the question (litterally and figuratively if you think about it)
exactly the point/problem with the Turing and 'teh singularity' paradigms
that's the correct analysis here
well said...this should be the paradigm in computing design
exactly...it's all based on a tautology...a faulty ontology. The Computability Function is not a computing paradigm, it's reductive.
'AI' is complex machines following instructions. That's what it is. The rest is people projecting their own emotions onto inanimate objects.
When I say "it's a tautology" what I mean is, it's based on linguistic distinctions only. Not actual, functional distinctions.
A tautology says, "If people think a pile of shit is a steak dinner, then it becomes a steak dinner"
That's an extremem example, but it's actually not that far off from what 'teh singularity' crowd are doing with 'ai'
I'm a telecommunications engineer and cyberneticist...my MS is in Information & Comm Science and I'm ABD in System Science
I'm working on promoting the *Cybernetic* ontology as the foundational paradigm for computing.
Cybernetics for computing would be a combination of Claude Shannon, Norbert Weiner, Lovelace, and others...
In the cybernetic paradigm, the Atanasoff-Berry Computer is the prototypical advancement.
ahem...i'm tweeting about this using the #cybernetics hashtag...it's my way of trying to promote the idea
The Turing and Computability Function paradigm for computing is (finally) being rightly and fully criticized (ironically, as we get a Turing hollywood movie)
Ada Lovelace's theories ***do indeed*** provide the theoretical ground work (along with others like Claude Shannon) to cleans ourselves of Turing Test nonsense
However...this test...in TFA is not the test.
It's just a variation on the Turing test that still has the same tautology...it's a test of fooling a human in an artificial, one time only environment...which has nothing to do with actual computing
We need to stop pretending we can make a machine that thinks like we do...
It's a tautology and a waste of resources.
Machines follow the instructions we give them via code. End.
true