On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 01:45:11PM -0400, Stephen P. King wrote:
> On 10/22/2012 2:32 AM, Russell Standish wrote:
> >On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 11:38:46PM -0400, Stephen P. King wrote:
> >>Hi Rusell,
> >>
> >>     How does Schmidhuber consider the physicality of resources?
> >>
> >>-- 
> >>Onward!
> >>
> >>Stephen
> >No. The concept doesn't enter consideration. What he considers is that
> >the Great Programmer has finite (or perhaps bounded resources), which
> >gives an additional boost to algorithms that run efficiently.
> >
> Hi Russell,
>     OK, so does Schmidhuber advocating an immaterialist ontology, as
> Bruno? I need to read the paper again, it has been a long time...
> -- 
> Onward!
> Stephen

Schmidhuber does not consider ontology at all. He merely asks the
question "What if we're living inside a universal dovetailer?". He
doesn't ask what the machine running the dovetailer is made of, nor
what the programmer that sets the machine is motion is made of. These
can be taken as literal or figurative as one likes, as they have no
impact on the conclusions.

In his second paper, he considers the question, what if the great
programmer has limited resources?

I'm not sure I really follow him there - a dovetailer running on a
finitely resourced machine is no longer universal. Also, computational
runtimes should be invisible to the denizens of the computation, as
Bruno points out in his UDA.



Prof Russell Standish                  Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics      hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
University of New South Wales          http://www.hpcoders.com.au

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to