3 ms·

I don't like this spin on humans as imperfect compared to the perfect computers. Of course humans will make more mistakes, when the immense complexity of the b

I don't like this spin on humans as imperfect compared to the perfect computers. Of course humans will make more mistakes, when the immense complexity of the business logic models they deal with surpasses what even the most advanced computer can process today. Plus, computers also make mistakes. They fail in arbitrary ways, and may produce an arbitrarily wrong result when you least expect it (say, if they overheat).

Dewie 12y ago
I think a distinction between "perfect" and "imperfect" can easily be made, in this case. Computers are great at executing algorithms, and never learning from their experiences. Humans are great at learning from their experiences, but pretty hit-or-miss when it comes to following algorithms. It is probably exactly that learn-ability that trips us humans up: we can learn new and beneficial things, but the flip side is that we can learn the wrong things. Clearly, we need both of these traits (predictability, learn-ability), and should probably delegate the tasks according to each others strengths. Of course, there is nothing fundamentally different between computers and humans (modulo some philosophical assumptions); in principle, we could implement very complex artificial neural networks, to the point that computers being deterministic might be as much of a useless distinction as considering sociological phenomena as deterministic - fine in a deterministic universe, but a pretty useless perspective for all practical purposes given the immense set of variables. We then gain learn-ability, or AI, but we also lose predictability. So we would probably still delegate the task of compiling programs to a very deterministic program over an incredibly advanced AI that, while sometimes having some good and creative insights when it comes to generating output code, sometimes also learns the wrong stuff and gives us just flat-out wrong output.
eloff 12y ago
Sure there are hardware errors too. But in the context of this discussion getting the compiler to check for bugs at compile time vs having runtime failures leads to less buggy software. The more you can push that burden onto your tools, which are far more perfect than human beings, the better.

Dewie 12y ago

I think a distinction between "perfect" and "imperfect" can easily be made, in this case. Computers are great at executing algorithms, and never learning from their experiences. Humans are great at learning from their experiences, but pretty hit-or-miss when it comes to following algorithms. It is probably exactly that learn-ability that trips us humans up: we can learn new and beneficial things, but the flip side is that we can learn the wrong things. Clearly, we need both of these traits (predictability, learn-ability), and should probably delegate the tasks according to each others strengths. Of course, there is nothing fundamentally different between computers and humans (modulo some philosophical assumptions); in principle, we could implement very complex artificial neural networks, to the point that computers being deterministic might be as much of a useless distinction as considering sociological phenomena as deterministic - fine in a deterministic universe, but a pretty useless perspective for all practical purposes given the immense set of variables. We then gain learn-ability, or AI, but we also lose predictability. So we would probably still delegate the task of compiling programs to a very deterministic program over an incredibly advanced AI that, while sometimes having some good and creative insights when it comes to generating output code, sometimes also learns the wrong stuff and gives us just flat-out wrong output.

eloff 12y ago

Sure there are hardware errors too. But in the context of this discussion getting the compiler to check for bugs at compile time vs having runtime failures leads to less buggy software. The more you can push that burden onto your tools, which are far more perfect than human beings, the better.