Newsgroups: comp.ai
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!nntp.crl.com!pacbell.com!amdahl.com!amd!amd.com!txnews.amd.com!news
From: Joseph Bridgewater <bridgwtr@vanzandt.amd.com>
Subject: Complexity of humans and computers
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <DDq5oL.M2@txnews.amd.com>
Sender: news@txnews.amd.com
Nntp-Posting-Host: corgi
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: n/a
References: <ncohen-1708951948040001@net-1-116.eden.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 18:21:55 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b5 (Windows; I; 32bit)
Lines: 38

Miriam,

ncohen@eden.com (Neil Cohen) wrote:
>MICHAEL FORREST  <Mlnf1@sonning.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>My view is that we do not yet know whether the difference between the 
>>human brain and a computer is one of the level of complexity, or of kind. 
>>If it is one of the level of complexity then the gap is still very large 
>>but it would not be correct to say that a computer cannot (ie will never 
>>be able to) psych.
[...]
>  I am not claiming that there can never be a computer which "thinks" the
>way humans do; but the current type of computer, which is limited to yes/
>no logic, simply cannot think the way people do.  There are numerous
>problems which have been *shown* to be unsolvable by computer, yet have
>been solved by human beings.  (BTW, when I say that the computer is
>limited to yes/no logic, I mean that it is based on a group of electrical
>cells, each of which either has a charge, or has no charge;  efforts
>are being made to construct computers which can work based on the degree
>of charge in a cell, i.e. they would use what is being called "Fuzzy
>Logic";  I haven't heard of any successes yet).
>
>-Miriam Harris-Botzum
> miriam@math.gwu.edu

May I ask for a little clarification; when you say (to the effect) that
the current type of computer connot think the way people do, are you saying
that they cannot in a fundamental (ie, electronic) fashion or are you
saying they are enitrely unsuitable for solving the problem?  For example, 
would you allow for a program to implement thinking on (essentially) any 
computer?

(please do not email to this address)

Thanks,
Joseph


