On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 10:48 AM Steve Richfield <[email protected]>
wrote:

> There seems to be a sort of universal confusion between "computer",
> digital computer", "stored program computer", et al.
>
> My very first computer program composed rock and roll melodies on a
> Borroughs E-101. It was a plugboard programmed electromechanical digital
> computer with no stored program.
>
> It WAS a computer, though not the sort that most folks here are used to
> dealing with.
>
>
 I would say it was 'computation' carried out on the basis of the physics
of the plugboard components. The 'program' or 'model', like that in
analog/neuromorphic computers, is hardwired and implicit. The variability
of parameters is in the adjustability in the suite of components available
to plug together.

My dad bought an ARP keyboard synthesiser in the 1970s. It was fantastic
fun. Same concept of plug-able interconnects. The same kind of
'computation' done on the basis of a known set of base functions (various
oscillators and modulation techniques). Computation of a model.

So my distinction is between 'computation' and 'computer'. By computer I
mean what ~100% of AGI folk use: Von_neumann digital. Of course this is a
very limited and poorly defined use of the word. But if you use the word
'computer' out in the real world, to neuroscientists, for example, that is
what the word invokes.

If you trundle over into 'neuromorphic computing' you'll see they almost
universally speak of 'computation' as 'emulation'. As if it isn't confused
enough.

If you and I, after 70 years, can still have an identifiable mismatch in
what we mean when we use the words COMPUTATION and COMPUTER, and clear
differences can be articulated, then we have proved that the science
disciplines involved (neuroscience and computer science) have no proper,
trained, understood, consistent grip on it either. Imagine that, after 70
years. And the entire project's goals are critically dependent on that
consistency. Use the word 'computer' in a paper. Use the word
'computation'. Use either word in an AI/AGI paragraph and then watch the
miscommunication go rife!

if you said 'to do AGI is to use a computer', what are you referring to? I
can build 2 AGI chips based on the brain. A) One with brain physics and B)
one with a digital computer physics computing a model of the brain physics.
Both are arguably 'computation' of some kind. Dress them both in the same
robot suit. *Which is AGI? *If that distinction in any way depends on the
difference in word meaning, the enterprise is in trouble and doesn't know
it.

You'd think that if AGI was properly set up as a profession, there's be no
mismatch in semantics. We'd all know what the words refer to and it would
be consistent.  The time for opinions is long passed.

cheers
colin

------------------------------------------
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T87761d322a3126b1-M72d061e54a57bbc873e40d38
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Reply via email to