Oh, I have. I've read a number of books on the topic because I find it fascinating! I still don't have a conclusion for myself. Everything could very well be a Turing complete molecular dynamics machine. Or, we may have the false assumption you posed. Or, there may be other functions out there that we simply have not figured out how to describe accurately.
Thank you for your comments, this has been the best conversation I've ever had on slashdot.
Point taken, however, I'm not necessarily subscribing to the idea of a god-given free will. I'm also not saying mindful intelligence is only for humans. There are still those who are not convinced that the mind is subject to only what could be computed or simulated; for example, qualia is a concept yet to modeled by computation. While it seems more people are leaning towards arguments that a sufficiently complex computer could simulate qualia these days, this is not a topic that we have just tossed out the window like "flat vs. spherical Earth".
I suppose the brain itself is implemented with molecular dynamics, my mistake. What I should have said was the mind; there are still philosophers that are not sure that everything associated with our "will" derives only from molecular dynamics in the brain..
What I said as a possibility: the brain is Turing complete and possibly something else undefined outside of that (e.g. something not algorithmic) . This results in another Turing Complete machine being only able to simulate a part of the brain's function.
Or, as you suggest: that the brain is not Turing Complete at all shows that claiming a Turing Complete machine could simulate it would lead to a false assumption.
I think both angles have to be demonstrated. Of course, we may eventually find that a Turing Complete machine is exactly what the brain is.
The brain is a Turing Complete machine, the computer is a Turing Complete machine, either can do the work of the other.
This assumes that the brain is a turing complete machine and nothing else. It is yet to be shown that the brain does not have any other functionality which another turing complete computer could not perform.
I think the unity interface looks kinda cool, and the first thought I had was that it would be neat on a tablet. However, it does nothing for usability on my desktop. Especially when programming via multiple terminal sessions. Which, is the only time that I really ever use linux. Thanks for judging me, one of Ubuntu's previous fans, asshole.
We are slowly figuring out how to use technology to actually make education better. The internet is really good at providing content to wide audiences, but education works best on a personal 1-on-1 basis.
Way to think myopically again. I'm sure oil harvesting seemed unlimited and inconsequential at one time to many. How about we actually put these technologies into measurable quantities?
I'm still slightly confused. "None" "0" "null design patterns" "undefined" "None option types" still sound like names for the same concept. Why is one solution better than another?
Can someone more experienced on the topic explain in-depth why people are complaining about there being "null" in Dart? I think it's pretty clear what not having a null reference would solve, but what are the solutions around not having null in cases where it is often used?
I agree that there has been a lot of innovation in the past decade as well. What seems to be a problem, along with many of the other problems listed already, is that most of these innovations seem to be very profitable. Most of it depends on ad revenue; most of these innovations don't actually produce anything that people need to buy. It's just made it easier for us to communicate.
This is a common issue with lockscreen replacements. "WidgetLocker Lockscreen" on the android market calls it the "5 second rule". You have to wait about 5 seconds after turning your screen off to turn it back on again if you want the replacement lockscreen to show instead of the default one.
I'm not sure why it's not a standard application request to replace the lockscreen, except that it could potentially be a security problem if any application could just decide to override another lockscreen.
I doubt that those who purchased parts from newegg.com in the past are going to completely shift to ultrathin laptops and tablets. Developers, gamers, hackers who bought parts from newegg in the past are still going to want to make custom systems in the future.
Kids are still interested in this as well. I taught middle schoolers how to build a PC from scratch, and wanted nothing more than to work on their custom machines.
There are a good number of small packages like these from academics with one intended purpose that are successful within the field they were developed for. Many times, people not in the field won't have any use for them.
I have often wondered the same thing. People tell me, "read the code and submit patches!" It may sound like hand-holding to experienced developers, but many new coders could really use an introduction to becoming a part of a community around a project.
What exactly do you think would be interesting on the public webservers of the NSA or DHS government websites? I'd be willing to bet, not much. A few HTML files, some images. Pretty much everything you could get without hacking it.
What more did you expect? Also, many of those user/pass combos are likely the same for other accounts, where the real damage to someone's identity could be done.
Slashdot Mirror
With Buffy, though, the integration will go much deeper, bringing friends and social activities deep into the mobile interface.
Is this supposed to be a sexual joke or is this article just terribly written?
Philosophy of Mind by Jaegwon Kim at Brown University is a good introduction book; although I can't say I necessarily understood all of it!
Oh, I have. I've read a number of books on the topic because I find it fascinating! I still don't have a conclusion for myself. Everything could very well be a Turing complete molecular dynamics machine. Or, we may have the false assumption you posed. Or, there may be other functions out there that we simply have not figured out how to describe accurately.
Thank you for your comments, this has been the best conversation I've ever had on slashdot.
Point taken, however, I'm not necessarily subscribing to the idea of a god-given free will. I'm also not saying mindful intelligence is only for humans. There are still those who are not convinced that the mind is subject to only what could be computed or simulated; for example, qualia is a concept yet to modeled by computation. While it seems more people are leaning towards arguments that a sufficiently complex computer could simulate qualia these days, this is not a topic that we have just tossed out the window like "flat vs. spherical Earth".
I suppose the brain itself is implemented with molecular dynamics, my mistake. What I should have said was the mind; there are still philosophers that are not sure that everything associated with our "will" derives only from molecular dynamics in the brain..
Turing-complete computers can perform anything.
that is algorithmic.
What I said as a possibility: the brain is Turing complete and possibly something else undefined outside of that (e.g. something not algorithmic) . This results in another Turing Complete machine being only able to simulate a part of the brain's function.
Or, as you suggest: that the brain is not Turing Complete at all shows that claiming a Turing Complete machine could simulate it would lead to a false assumption.
I think both angles have to be demonstrated. Of course, we may eventually find that a Turing Complete machine is exactly what the brain is.
The brain is a Turing Complete machine, the computer is a Turing Complete machine, either can do the work of the other.
This assumes that the brain is a turing complete machine and nothing else. It is yet to be shown that the brain does not have any other functionality which another turing complete computer could not perform.
Yo dawg, InfoWorld fails the geek test with their quiz failing to load.
I think I saw this at a laser show in 1990. Using a projector instead of a laser isn't really that interesting.
I think the unity interface looks kinda cool, and the first thought I had was that it would be neat on a tablet. However, it does nothing for usability on my desktop. Especially when programming via multiple terminal sessions. Which, is the only time that I really ever use linux. Thanks for judging me, one of Ubuntu's previous fans, asshole.
We are slowly figuring out how to use technology to actually make education better. The internet is really good at providing content to wide audiences, but education works best on a personal 1-on-1 basis.
Interesting! And also, quite different than "unlimited".
Way to think myopically again. I'm sure oil harvesting seemed unlimited and inconsequential at one time to many. How about we actually put these technologies into measurable quantities?
Ah! Now I understand what the issue is. Thanks!
I'm still slightly confused. "None" "0" "null design patterns" "undefined" "None option types" still sound like names for the same concept. Why is one solution better than another?
Can someone more experienced on the topic explain in-depth why people are complaining about there being "null" in Dart? I think it's pretty clear what not having a null reference would solve, but what are the solutions around not having null in cases where it is often used?
I agree that there has been a lot of innovation in the past decade as well. What seems to be a problem, along with many of the other problems listed already, is that most of these innovations seem to be very profitable. Most of it depends on ad revenue; most of these innovations don't actually produce anything that people need to buy. It's just made it easier for us to communicate.
This is a common issue with lockscreen replacements. "WidgetLocker Lockscreen" on the android market calls it the "5 second rule". You have to wait about 5 seconds after turning your screen off to turn it back on again if you want the replacement lockscreen to show instead of the default one. I'm not sure why it's not a standard application request to replace the lockscreen, except that it could potentially be a security problem if any application could just decide to override another lockscreen.
I doubt that those who purchased parts from newegg.com in the past are going to completely shift to ultrathin laptops and tablets. Developers, gamers, hackers who bought parts from newegg in the past are still going to want to make custom systems in the future.
Kids are still interested in this as well. I taught middle schoolers how to build a PC from scratch, and wanted nothing more than to work on their custom machines.
UCODE
PEST
Dakota
Visit
PETSc
There are a good number of small packages like these from academics with one intended purpose that are successful within the field they were developed for. Many times, people not in the field won't have any use for them.
I rootkitted your rootkit so you can rootkit while you rootkit.
I have often wondered the same thing. People tell me, "read the code and submit patches!" It may sound like hand-holding to experienced developers, but many new coders could really use an introduction to becoming a part of a community around a project.
What exactly do you think would be interesting on the public webservers of the NSA or DHS government websites? I'd be willing to bet, not much. A few HTML files, some images. Pretty much everything you could get without hacking it.
Google already does this, and no I don't want this tracking feature.
What more did you expect? Also, many of those user/pass combos are likely the same for other accounts, where the real damage to someone's identity could be done.