3 ms·

I think you're missing the point. Unlike in the case of an ideal Turing machine, nothing in this universe transitions through states without energy. Computers r

I think you're missing the point. Unlike in the case of an ideal Turing machine, nothing in this universe transitions through states without energy. Computers rely on the power grid to run their processor cycles, even though I doubt that you would consider computers to not be Turing complete. This is not that different from the Excel example: the system displays Turing completeness if supplied a clock as input (a person clicking a button in the spreadsheet, for instance). The human is not making any decisions in this case - the logic manifests itself entirely from within the system.

edgyquant 4y ago
That user didn’t “miss the point” and you’ve only reiterated their point that by your logic a piece of paper and pencil is “Turing complete”
- curiousgal 4y ago
  You missed their point, a piece of paper and pencil is not making any decisions.
  - posterboy 4y ago
    The turing machine isn't mindful, anyway, the engineer is. You don't have to turn this into a philosophical problem that will inevitably pitch hypothetical GAI against menial workers, thousand monkeys on a typewriter, or equivalently a young person and billions of neurons on blank canvas. That's not anymore about the technical point of the submission. It would need back up from psychology to remain remotely technical: why did the chicken cross the road?
- linschn 4y ago
  No, it seems that you are the one that don't understand. A piece of paper is not Turing Complete because the computation happens in the head of whoever is holding the pen. An excel sheet (or actually a power point presentation!) is, because the user just has to mindlessly, unconditionally, do a simple, non computational action to make the cycles go forward. There is a difference between the two scenario, and if you can't see it, please do ask questions until I'm able to make that clear to you.

edgyquant 4y ago

That user didn’t “miss the point” and you’ve only reiterated their point that by your logic a piece of paper and pencil is “Turing complete”

curiousgal 4y ago
You missed their point, a piece of paper and pencil is not making any decisions.
- posterboy 4y ago
  The turing machine isn't mindful, anyway, the engineer is. You don't have to turn this into a philosophical problem that will inevitably pitch hypothetical GAI against menial workers, thousand monkeys on a typewriter, or equivalently a young person and billions of neurons on blank canvas. That's not anymore about the technical point of the submission. It would need back up from psychology to remain remotely technical: why did the chicken cross the road?
linschn 4y ago
No, it seems that you are the one that don't understand. A piece of paper is not Turing Complete because the computation happens in the head of whoever is holding the pen. An excel sheet (or actually a power point presentation!) is, because the user just has to mindlessly, unconditionally, do a simple, non computational action to make the cycles go forward. There is a difference between the two scenario, and if you can't see it, please do ask questions until I'm able to make that clear to you.