>> If it's not random then it happened for a reason, and things happen in a computer for a reason too. Sure, but the "reason" may not be amenable to being completely contained within the confines of a deterministic algorithm if it depends on a series of outside processes that are not under the algorithms operational control and that are highly variable and transient. The reason may depend on a very large set of orthogonal factors each of which Is evolving and mutating along a separate dimension. Try modeling complexity like this and it can lead to spontaneous brain explosion :) > At the time it may have been a supercomputer but that was 16 years agoand the > computer you're reading this E mail message on right now is almost certainly > more powerful than the computer that beat the best human chess player in the > world. And chess programs have gotten a lot better too. So all that spaghetti > and complexity at the cellular level that you were rhapsodizing about didn't > work as well as an antique computer running a ancient chess program. You are incorrect even today Deep Blue is still quite powerful compared to a PC The Deep Blue machine specs: It was a massively parallel, RS/6000 SP Thin P2SC-based system with 30 nodes, with each node containing a 120 MHz P2SC microprocessor for a total of 30, enhanced with 480 special purpose VLSI chess chips. Its chess playing program was written in C and ran under the AIX operating system. It was capable of evaluating 200 million positions per second, twice as fast as the 1996 version. In June 1997, Deep Blue was the 259th most powerful supercomputer according to the TOP500 list, achieving 11.38 GFLOPS on the High-Performance LINPACK benchmark.[12] I doubt the machine you are writing your email on even comes close to that level of performance; I know mine does not achieve that level of performance.
________________________________ From: John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com> To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 12:43 PM Subject: Re: When will a computer pass the Turing Test? On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 Chris de Morsella <cdemorse...@yahoo.com> wrote: > A stochastic system may be reducible to being modeled by some set of random > variation > Yes. >but In reality it is often a whole lot more subtle than that and the >"randomness" is not random If it's not random then it happened for a reason, and things happen in a computer for a reason too. >>Ask yourself this question, why weren't all those fantastically complex >>transient dynamic branches in a neural network by the name of Grandmaster >>Gary Kasparov able to beat a 16 year old computer running a 16 year old chess >>program? > > not sure how this has bearing > Is that true, are you really not sure how that has any bearing? I am sure. > The super computer that finally beat him had a massive number crunching ability > At the time it may have been a supercomputer but that was 16 years ago and the computer you're reading this E mail message on right now is almost certainly more powerful than the computer that beat the best human chess player in the world. And chess programs have gotten a lot better too. So all that spaghetti and complexity at the cellular level that you were rhapsodizing about didn't work as well as an antique computer running a ancient chess program. John K Clark - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
