Re: Social Contract GR's Affect on sarge
On Tue, 27 Apr 2004, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> Don Armstrong wrote:
> > On Mon, 26 Apr 2004, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> > > Program: Software which is intended for execution on an actually
> > > existing interpreter.
> > >
> > > Data: Software which is not ~.
> >
> > Trivial refuation: the extant interpreter for (most) data is a human
> > brain. [And yes, your brain is, for lack of a better word, executing
> > said data.]
>
> The human brain is way too limited for that task. Just explain me
> how your brain interprets a bitstream which represents a JPEG of
> non-trivial size. :-)
Not particularly well, but I'd imagine that there are people out there
who wouldn't have that much trouble with it. Moreover, while
difficult, it's not something that's inherently impossible.
Furthermore, there's no reason to require that the data not be
preprocessed into a form more suitable for the interpreter doing the
interpretation. [Or do you want to require that all interpreters talk
only in machine code?]
Finally, there's no requirement in your definition for there to be
reasonable (or correct) output or for execution to take a reasonable
amount of time. [You can't really add these two requirements, because
you'll eliminate buggy programs and infinte loops respectively, both
of which are quite obviously programs.]
Don Armstrong
--
"There's nothing remarkable about it. All one has to do is hit the
right keys at the right time and the instrument plays itself."
-- Bach
http://www.donarmstrong.com
http://rzlab.ucr.edu
Reply to: