[Reader-list] Alternative software???

[Pankaj Kaushal]

***Sorry fellow earthlings I give in to the troll***

Dear Are,
	Sorry for the interruption but as a student of Theory of
	computation, I am sorry to say neither I or Turing will
	agree to the first paragraph of your mail 

On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 09:52:54PM -0500, Are Flagan wrote:
Are Flagan> The below is a short, original essay intended for the reader-list discussion
Are Flagan> on software. It implicitly makes the claim that software can never truly be
Are Flagan> alternative, as it is simply a lifeform sustained by and within the
Are Flagan> universality of hardware. The essay argues this view through the life and
Are Flagan> works of Alan Turing.
	
	First of all the question is not about either hardware or software
	or that software is dependent on hardware. the later is just an
	assumption people make or are taught by other people who dont understand 
	computing very well. The mail motive is to solve a problem and
	if a turing machine can solve that problem then it is logicaly solvable
	and then the implementation of it can be in hardware or hardware dependent
	software or hardware independent but software dependent software.
	
	There are certain problems which considered undecidable thus, unsolvable by
	computers for example the problem that the set of all functions f:N->N is
	unsolvable by turing machine. 

Are Flagan> The questions that immediately follow would pertain to how, or if, software
Are Flagan> can at all be considered alternative, in the sense that it offers a critique
Are Flagan> of the universal principles laid down by hardware.

	Again it is foolish to assume that software is dependent on hardware or that
	the universal principles of computation are laid down by hardware, hardware
	design or limitaitons of hardware components.

	
Are Flagan> Within this ultimate limit of decidability, important questions of propriety
Are Flagan> and determination loom. Reiterating the thoughts conjured thus far: all
Are Flagan> software is realized against the ground of a universal system as operative
Are Flagan> incarnations of mind. The troubling conclusion must be that it subsists,
Are Flagan> virtually if you like, under the umbrella of a mastermind, which defines the
Are Flagan> very outer limits of its expression and offers infinite permutations of
Are Flagan> interminable life in return. Questions of machine intelligence, importantly
Are Flagan> entered as both the recognition and deception of the human in an either/or
Are Flagan> scenario, appears only against the ground of purposefully ignoring the
Are Flagan> universal mastermind, taking software at face value, and immediately
Are Flagan> entering into the loop of its algorithms upon first considering the query.
Are Flagan> What the Turing Test ultimately proposes for software to pass as intelligent
Are Flagan> is that it answers all questions according to the universalized norm of a
Are Flagan> normality,
	
	There is a concept called nondeterministic turing machine just as
	finite automata is allowed to act nondeterministcally. a nondeterministic
	turing machin can produce two different outputs to the same input.
	
Are Flagan> His final act was a poetic revenge on the life's work that ultimately
Are Flagan> ostracized and betrayed him. The man who provided important breakthroughs in
Are Flagan> the development of modern computing and broke the code that helped the
Are Flagan> allies win the war was killed by a paltry logic he could not defeat. Recall
Are Flagan> that his interest in the embodiment and preservation of mind in matter that
Are Flagan> led to the pioneering work on Turing Machines stemmed from a lost and deeply
Are Flagan> mourned companionship with another man. The relations Turing desired in
Are Flagan> computing were at their inception directed at one missed individual, rather
Are Flagan> than a generalized and disciplined body. They also spoke of a sexual
Are Flagan> difference--subtly restated in his choice of sex to determine human
Are Flagan> intelligence in the Turing Test--that cautiously countered the machine's
Are Flagan> universality. Once such pensive constructs enter the very definitions
Are Flagan> garnered here--those of our relations formed with the machine through
Are Flagan> hardware and our proof of its intelligent humanity in software--their
Are Flagan> universality as modes of knowledge about the life they perpetuate is called
Are Flagan> into question. When Turing took a bite of the cyanide-laced apple, he chewed
Are Flagan> a chunk of that encounter in the Garden of Eden, which punished curiosity
Are Flagan> when it interfered with commands; he tarnished the purity of Snow White and
Are Flagan> the gravity of Newton's eureka that found enlightenment through reason. In
Are Flagan> computing, there should always be a lingering aftertaste--a protracted
Are Flagan> mortality--that recalls the tang of sweet and bitter juices Turing must have
Are Flagan> savored as he pondered the fruits of his work, in that final system failure.
Are Flagan> [7]
	
	do you have any clue to what you are writing interpreting 
	imssinterprating.
	
	
-- 
$you = new YOU;
honk() if $you->love(perl);