3 ms·
Probably, though it could also be a way to say "The language in which algorithms from 'The Book'[1] are written." It would be fun if quantum computing were equ
by repsilat 8y ago
Probably, though it could also be a way to say "The language in which algorithms from 'The Book'[1] are written."
It would be fun if quantum computing were equivalent to classical (less fun -- probabilistic) models with comparable complexity, just more intuitive. I guess lots of complexity conjectures can be phrased that way, though -- P vs NP for sure.
1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proofs_from_THE_BOOK https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proofs_from_THE_BOOK
- Retra 8y agoThere isn't any compelling reason to favor one person's fiction over another's. We can invoke memetic references to magic mechanisms all day long and accomplish little.
- repsilat 8y agoErm, that's a little abstract for me, but I guess you're saying that aesthetic judgements of programs aren't worth much from a theoretical perspective? If so, I'd say, - It didn't really seem like anyone in the comment thread was trying to make a "compelling" argument for anything -- we're just chatting here. - If we were interested in that sort of thing, we might note that minimal program size is a good measure of language complexity/information, and that "algorithms from the book" and different models of computation that might make programs easier to write are both "objectively interesting" from an information-theoretic standpoint. EDIT: oh wait, I get it, you weren't being constructive, you just came here to make fun of a religion nobody was talking about. Never mind.