Re:The Future of Computer Science (2018)
by K0balt on Wednesday March 27, 2024 @07:57AM
(#39837895)
It seems like there is a fallacy baked in here; that since all computaion is Turing-computable, that all models of computation are equivalent?
A computation system is an execution mechanism plus data on which to compute, plus an program or meta-algorithm. Otherwise the computation and the mechanism are unified and the device is a calculator, and not a computer.
The assumption that systems with unknown data and algorithms (somewhat the current state of LLMS) are fundamentally not Turing computable is demonstrably false.
That the Turing machine itself is fundamentally a different computation mechanism than a Turing machine with a program of arbitrary complexity, however, is true, and is what I think the author may be rubbing against?
The meta-algorithm of a program vs the algorithm inherent in processing equipment is I think what the author is seeing here. some languages seek to constrain the potential randomness of the meta-algorithm . This does certainly constrain the possibilities of their output, by design, and can be as constraining to innovation as it is to undesired behavior for this reason; the requirement is to understand the problem in its entirety before beginning, which is to say that these languages excel at problems that are a priory already solved.
Anyway, that’s my ramble about the authors ramble lol.
A computation system is an execution mechanism plus data on which to compute, plus an program or meta-algorithm. Otherwise the computation and the mechanism are unified and the device is a calculator, and not a computer.
The assumption that systems with unknown data and algorithms (somewhat the current state of LLMS) are fundamentally not Turing computable is demonstrably false.
That the Turing machine itself is fundamentally a different computation mechanism than a Turing machine with a program of arbitrary complexity, however, is true, and is what I think the author may be rubbing against?
The meta-algorithm of a program vs the algorithm inherent in processing equipment is I think what the author is seeing here. some languages seek to constrain the potential randomness of the meta-algorithm . This does certainly constrain the possibilities of their output, by design, and can be as constraining to innovation as it is to undesired behavior for this reason; the requirement is to understand the problem in its entirety before beginning, which is to say that these languages excel at problems that are a priory already solved.
Anyway, that’s my ramble about the authors ramble lol.