It is ironic that Alan Turing himself thought that actual computing in the universe included (to a large extent) non-Turing computing (where "Turing" here means what became the standard definition as being carried out by the commonly-defined "Turing machine"). That "computing" became synonymous with "Turing-machine computing" can't be blamed on Alan Turing.
Alan Turing HIS WORK AND IMPACT Edited by S. BARRY COOPER University of Leeds, UK and JAN VAN LEEUWEN Utrecht University, The Netherlands 2013 https://oecdinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Alan-Turing.pdf Aaron Sloman absolves Turing of — The Mythical Turing Test In his 1950 paper, Turing described his famous ‘imitation game’, defining a test that he thought machines would pass by the end of the century. It is often claimed that Turing was proposing a test for intelligence. I think that assumption is mistaken (a) because Turing was far too intelligent to propose a test with so many flaws, (b) because his words indicate that he thought it would be a silly thing to do, and (c) because there is an alternative, much more defensible, reading of his paper as making a technological prediction, whose main function was to provide a unifying framework for discussing and refuting some common arguments against the possibility of intelligent machines.1 I shall try to explain (i) why the common interpretation of Turing’s paper is mistaken, (ii) why the idea of a test for intelligence in a machine or animal is misguided, and (iii) why a different sort of test, not for a specific machine or animal, but for a genome or generic class of developing systems, would be of greater scientific and philosophical interest. That sort of test was not proposed by Turing, and is very different from the many proposed revisions of Turing’s test, since it would require many instances of the design allowed to develop in a variety of environments. to be tested. That would be an experiment in meta-morphogenesis, the topic of my paper in Part IV of this volume. @philipthrift On Saturday, May 25, 2019 at 12:19:49 PM UTC-5, howardmarks wrote: > > Bruno's statement is quite understandable. Ya gotta know about the work of > Alan Turing (circa 1950's). He is referring to Turing's test for human-like > intelligent behavior manifestations (of computers, machines) with the > halting issue being whether it's possible to discover whether an > "intelligent" machine will, at some point, halt or run "forever." > cheers! Howard Marks > > On 5/25/2019 8:12 AM, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List wrote: > > You didn't answer the question (probably the politically correctness > indoctrination is keeping you from telling the truth): Did you understand > what Bruno is talking about ? > > On Saturday, 25 May 2019 13:21:19 UTC+3, Quentin Anciaux wrote: >> >> Obviously, you can't. I'm sorry for you. >> > > -- 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 [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/51db461d-0363-4e91-85de-6002ae584c4a%40googlegroups.com.
