Re:Margaret Mead, Technocracy, and the origins of AI's ideol...
by RamblingCTO on Wednesday November 22, 2023 @07:40AM
(#38378415)
Yeah, feels like this discussion takes the "computer" part too serious when talking about computer science. Computing isn't necessarily something with a computer. CompSci is about solving problems in general. I'd argue that we just went the normal way a science does. You start by having everyone involved, then you narrow down and focus. In CompSci, focus isn't really what's happening though, as it got broader and broader. The core principle (solving problems) still remains. We'll probably see a split down the line as well.
Re:Margaret Mead, Technocracy, and the origins of AI's ideol...
by 23B1 on Wednesday November 22, 2023 @08:01AM
(#38378584)
Penrose disagrees!
Re:Margaret Mead, Technocracy, and the origins of AI's ideol...
by BanTheBastards on Wednesday November 22, 2023 @08:43AM
(#38378990)
Penrose is obviously wrong and has been repeatedly criticized for his shoddy thinking when it comes to cognition.
That's literally what the whole thing is about - you model a problem as a bunch of cybernetics/control theory equations (with or without helper diagrams of boxes and arrows), do some computing on it, and implement the result in the physical world. In many cases, the computational model is partially included in the result itself - the physical control system includes a computer (whether it's an analog or digital one) that keeps the physical system stable by means of computation, i.e. "simply a matter of computing".
(In general, I feel many people didn't get the memo: "computing" isn't something "techbros" do; computing is a fundamental part of how we understand the world works - up there with energy conservation, thermodynamics, etc.)