Ive had a suspicion for a while that despite the astonishing success of the first generation of computer scientists like Shannon, Turing, von Neumann, and Wiener, somehow they didnt get a few important starting points quite right, and some things in the foundations of computer science are fundamentally askew. In a way I have no right to say this and it would be more appropriate to say it once Ive actually got something to take its place, so let me just emphasize that this is speculative. But where might things have gone wrong?
http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/lanier03/lanier_index.html
Popular Posts
-
I've learned a great many things over the past month... "friends" at work are not neccessarily friends, people you thought wer...
-
Lots of funny stuff today. Tim, check this one. http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php3
-
Brad Dalton is the first to admit his theory is far-fetched: that bacteria could account for odd light emissions, as well as the reddish hue...
-
In a mine in California, scientists found the smallest bacteria so far discovered -- living in conditions as acidic as battery acid. Why thi...
-
Some good stuff from a Canadian futurist: - The rising power of the knowledge worker - Continuous training replaces job security; respect is...
-
Very dry, dull book with some basic financial info like ROI and cash flow. Not a lot here.
-
I had the pleasure to attend the IBM Think conference in wet and chilly San Fran from Feb 11-14th of this year. The event overall was ...
-
The probes findings have provided a few salient new notions about the nature of cosmic reality. For starters, the universe is 13.7 billion y...
-
Good acting, great writing, but ultimately falls flat due to it's inner pretentiousness and consequence-free portrayal of teen pregnancy...
-
Here's my (edited) journal entry for this event dated 12/01/98: Wow. I just sessioned and started reading "The Tao of Physics...
