3 ms·

Uh oh, Regex is approaching sentience.

• MaxBarraclough 5y ago
  Every known sentient being is a finite state machine. Every finite state machine corresponds to a regular expression, and vice versa.
  • JadeNB 5y ago
    > Every known sentient being is a finite state machine. I know this is just a cutesy slogan, but how could you possibly know whether a living creature is a finite state machine? What would it even mean? I know I don't respond identically to identical stimuli presented on different occasions ….
    • throwamon 5y ago
      Obnoxious, I mean, trivial, answer: Just make "occasions" a variable. Assuming your lifetime is finite, you could simply assign each point in time to a value, and there you have it: a finite mapping from each moment to a state.
    • MaxBarraclough 5y ago
      > I know this is just a cutesy slogan Mostly, yes, but I do think there's a real point here as well. > how could you possibly know whether a living creature is a finite state machine? As I understand it, physicists don't really know whether the physical world has a finite number of states, or an infinite number. I think they tend to lean toward finite, though. Even if it's infinite, I doubt it's of consequence. That is to say, I doubt that sentience depends on the physical possibility of an infinite number of states. (Of course, if it turns out the physical world only has a finite number of states, that demonstrates that sentience is compatible with the finite-states constraint.) > What would it even mean? Systems can be modelled as finite state machines. Sentient entities like people are extremely sophisticated systems, but that's just a matter of degree, not of category. > I know I don't respond identically to identical stimuli presented on different occasions Right, because you're in a different state. You'll never be in the same state twice. We don't need to resort to non-determinism.