Benefit of the doubt: how do you consider that racist? The way I read it:
Trump's policies target non-white, non-European heritage people. These names heavily insinuate that all authors fit that demographic.
They're not insulting the demographics or saying races are different, they're pointing out that having access to some of the world's smartest minds as immigrants is a great boon for this country and that we rely on them heavily for our own success.
They aren't saying they aren't Americans, either. But the chilling effect has consequences over time. Anyway, Trump is attempting to deport US citizens today. One of which is a sitting US politician. So is that nuanced downstream effect even needed to worry for these folk and our future?
First, TMs don't have a stack. Second, still no recurrent state needed.
Extending a state with additional variables doesn't make a unique state less unique anyway, so "total state" is always more or same unique as "just tape".
Some turing machine variants have multiple tapes, effectively registers.
If the tape, instruction position, and all other variables are the same as any previous step, then the deterministic machine is going to continue to find itself in that loop, and never halt.
Think Collatz like functions - if the output starts into a loop, you know the end result.
However, any program trying to detect all loops by maintaining a bloom filter of every previous state doesnt work, that drags any computation down by a scale of its inputs^runtime.
Yes, doesn't change the fact that you do not have to hit such a state to have a non-halting program. I already gave an example: a program that continuously writes to the tape will not stop, and since the tape is always different, will not trigger your loop detection.
Exactly, never the same state. And still doesn't halt. That's the point. You cannot detect all non-halting programs by detecting if they go into the same state again. They can, but don't have to.
I had thought this was all people misunderstanding each other's descriptions of their inner subjective experiences; but if this is accurate I switch sides.
Electricity in the brain is all we are.
Also its more aligned with the general theory of mind, that destinct variety of peoples would naturally observe destinct variations of sensory qualia and exhibit different internal subjective experiences.
Naturally conscious language fails to articulate these gaps because they are themselves the lack of words.
reply