@Duoas
Wow. Calm down.
I see that instead of addressing my points one by one, and disproving them where you disagreed; you took my whole argument as a whole and turned it into an insult. Essentially, you used the same method as a child. Nice one. I have an excuse - I'm less than half your age, my mind hasn't developed. Of course
I'm going to be ignorant and stupid. But you, being an adult, are supposed to show better judgment.
If by this:
I can't debate with amateur philosophers. |
you are referring to this:
Here's something for you. Essentially, everything that lives, lives to make more of itself. I mentioned, to a friend, a type of fly that lives for only a few hours -- just long enough to reproduce. It doesn't even eat or drink. It's born, it lays eggs, then dies. His response was "What is the point of that?"
What is the point of anything? All you do in life leads up to one thing - IRL fork() [(that was a joke)]. |
that's just something I thought would be found interesting by anyone who hadn't already though of it. It was not an opportunity for you to decide I think I'm some kind of Aristotle in the making or something and then attack me for it.
I also see you ignored my attempt at friendly conversation. Please don't talk to me again. I don't like talking to adults that act like children.
@helios
Too much input, my brain got bored.
Actually, in that regard brains are exactly like computers. The difference is in how they process the data, and I'm not just talking about differences in chemical and electrical processes. Computers use chiefly linear processes, with very few parts parallelized, while brains are almost fully parallel, if that statement makes any sense. |
If by that, you mean that computers process everything linearly (that is, as it appears (like when streaming data?)) that's not strictly true, is it? CPUs can process instructions out-of-order to (I assume) process them more efficiently or something. Unless I misunderstand you.
The example I mentioned above about doing 1.0+2.0 a million times can be completed in exactly the same time as just once thanks to memoization. |
Actually, yeah. I didn't think of that -- once a human had calculated 1.0+2.0, if you asked them again they'd just recall it from memory. Although I think computers will definitely be able to do that. Perhaps they could store in ROM the result of every calculation they've ever performed? Now that'd probably take too much memory; but hell... they make 1 TiB hard disks now, when twenty years ago they were making 1.4 MiB floppy disks.
And olny a bairn cloud mkae snesn of tihs. It wloud taek a hlel of a lot of pminrrgamog to get a cpomtuer to udtersnand this. |
Lol. I read somewhere that as long as the first and last letters are in the right places, it can still be made sense of (at least in English, I don't know if it works in other languages). Then again, I think I read that in a signature on a forum somewhere (I'm so glad this forum doesn't have signatures)...
Edit: A computer could understand some of that. If it was parsed word by word and checked (in the same way search engines remove spelling errors, I think it's called CBR or something; anyway I think they check each word against a database of correctly spelled words and the closest match is suggested as the correct answer), maybe it would eventually get the correct sentence using some kind of brute force algorithm. It'd probably spew about twenty different matches though. That's something a human couldn't do. I couldn't sit there and process that string into every possible match. Well, I could; but I'd be bound to make mistakes and I'd get bored. Also, it would take me HOURS. It'd probably take a computer a few minutes at most to do that...
Although, I guess a computer wouldn't really "understand" that. Computers are dumb. They just do things... that's probably the one thing they won't ever overcome -- they'll never truly understand what you're telling them to do, they'll just do it.