Newsgroups: comp.ai.alife
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!news.mathworks.com!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!Austria.EU.net!newsfeed.ACO.net!swidir.switch.ch!news.unige.ch!usenet
From: sylvere@divsun.unige.ch (Silvere Martin-Michiellot)
Subject: Re: Nested hierarchical programming, you say?
Message-ID: <1995Feb9.163137.26348@news.unige.ch>
Sender: usenet@news.unige.ch
Reply-To: sylvere@divsun.unige.ch
Organization: University of Geneva, Switzerland
References: <86@reservoir.win-uk.net>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 16:31:37 GMT
Lines: 46

In article 86@reservoir.win-uk.net, shane@reservoir.win-uk.net (Shane McKee) writes:
> Hello, folks.
> 
> This post is related to several of the threads currently running in
> this newsgroup, most notably Thought Question & What is Life. Much
> has been said about inability of certain systems to evolve, and
> the brain not computing the way a computer does. I remember as a
> youngster watching 'Tomorrow's World' (UK), when they were running
> a version of a neural net, recognizing letters of the alphabet in
> different fonts. They said that this was different from what a
> traditional computer could do.
> 
> This puzzled me - because a traditional computer was doing it! I
> realized that what was happening was that the traditional
> computing was propping up a structure (the neural net) which lay
> nested inside its own programming structure (still making sense?
> Prob. not).
> 
> My point is this. Simulating intelligence, or creating
> life-in-silico is not going to be a first-order thing. You can't
> just program for it. You may need to construct a second-order
> structure (S') in which to construct a third-order structure
> (S''), in which to construct... S''', S'''' etc, before you get to
> intelligence, consciousness, or life.
> 
> The analogy with the universe should be evident: atoms, molecules,
> cells, organs, organisms.... 
> 
> Do you get my drift?
> 
> If we have any universal Turing machine, this nested hierarchical
> concept should be workable.
> 
> Pros? Cons?

Cons : there is no formal need to do such a thing : any computer will achieve the same result leading to consciousness or not. The real question is : can computer be conscious.
Of course I recognize that it is easier to program with lisp than using assembly code but whatever the language, you can built the same things.

-----------------

"Is anyone alive down there ?"
 

Silvere MARTIN-MICHIELLOT


