Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #160525

Re: The True Aficionado?

From "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com>
Newsgroups alt.folklore.computers
Subject Re: The True Aficionado?
Date 2016-03-04 03:45 +1100
Message-ID <djr81lFm4ebU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References (16 earlier) <PM00052C976DF0A4D2@aca2d6f2.ipt.aol.com> <djlnc5F93ihU2@mid.individual.net> <PM00052D115027C687@aca43c61.ipt.aol.com> <djok0sF1k31U2@mid.individual.net> <PM00052D2521DCF4E4@aca40c8f.ipt.aol.com>

Show all headers | View raw



"jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message 
news:PM00052D2521DCF4E4@aca40c8f.ipt.aol.com...
> Rod Speed wrote:
>>
>>
>> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>> news:PM00052D115027C687@aca43c61.ipt.aol.com...
>>> Rod Speed wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:PM00052C976DF0A4D2@aca2d6f2.ipt.aol.com...
>>>>> hgww wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:PM00052C8429A98276@aca2d65f.ipt.aol.com...
>>>>>>> hgww wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:PM00052C5C2FA4288E@aca40f57.ipt.aol.com...
>>>>>>>>> mentificium@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Btw (by the way) I hope to provide an orignal
>>>>>>>>>> "prior art" AI that leads to a kind of
>>>>>>>>>> "pre-Cambrian explosion" of AI life-forms.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> By calling the Perl AI "Ghost", I hint at
>>>>>>>>>> the idea of "The Ghost in the Machine" and
>>>>>>>>>> at "The Soul of a New Machine" by T. Kidder.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I can tell you that the soul of a machine is a conglomerate
>>>>>>>>> of the developers and other workers who did the work
>>>>>>>>> to produce the hard/software.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That's not really true of those who do the donkey
>>>>>>>> work like say wire wrapping the backplane with
>>>>>>>> stuff of your generation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's especially true in this case.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bullshit. Those are no different to the machines that replaced them
>>>>>> later.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think you would recognize a machine soul.
>>>>
>>>> There is no such animal and even if there was,
>>>> those human robots are no part of it anyway.
>>>
>>> Every machine had its own "personality".
>>
>> They still do. BUT that has nothing to do with
>> stuff like the machines used to make the machine.
>> And so when we had humans who were JUST doing
>> what machines did later, the wire wrapping, THOSE
>> people contributed nothing to the personality.
>
> Of course they did.  Every wire-wrapped machine had it
> quirks.  Fixing hardware bugs could cause more quirks.

That is a completely separate question to whether that
machine had any part in the personality of the machine
it was doing the wire wrapping of.

I can see where you have gone wrong now, you assumed
I was talking about the personality of the wire wrapping
machine. I wasn’t. I was making the point that the wire
wrapping machine does not contribute to the personality
of the machine it is making.

>>> I have never figured out how to describe this other
>>> than using human attributes.  Merging two machines
>>> together created a different personality.
>>
>> Using a machine to do part of the manufacture of
>> a machine like with wire wrapping does not create
>> a different machine and doing it with robot humans
>> doesn’t either.
>
> When I talked about merging two machines, I meant going
> from a single-CPU system to a dual-CPU or triple-CPU system.

That isnt merging two machines, that is changing the design
of one machine.

>>> When they were split into two systems,
>>> they reverted back to their old personality.
>>
>> Not when one of them is used for manufacture.
>>
>>> Each customer's machine was also different.
>>
>> That mangles the real story too, particularly
>> when the customer has lots of the one machine.

> Not really.

Yes, really.

> Each machine had its own user population.

No they do no, most obviously with server farms.

> Those users did different things at different times.

Utterly mangled all over again with server farms.

>>> Some of that had to do with the kind of
>>> care of the center and usage of the users.
>>
>>> When one was sent to work on site, one of the first
>>> things a person did was learn about that personality.
>>
>> BULLSHIT. In spades with modern smartphones.
>
> I'm NOT talking about todays machines.

You claim has to be valid for all machines.

> They have the personalities of a slug
> after it's been run over by a steam roller.

Even sillier than you usually manage with smartphones alone.

They do in fact have much more personality because
some of them are much more limited resource wise.

>> And that is all completely irrelevant to your original
>> silly claim that the machine used in the manufacture
>> of the machine is part of the personality of the
>> machine that it is used in the manufacture of.

> Boy, when you go off the deep end of misreading what I wrote,

You are the one that did that when you assumed I was talking
about the personality of the wire wrapping machine. I wasn’t.

> you create a Grand Canyon.

More of your wild exaggeration, even sillier than the
claim above about the personality of smartphones. 

Back to alt.folklore.computers | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-21 15:48 +0000
  Re: The True Aficionado? mentificium@gmail.com - 2016-02-21 13:43 -0800
    Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-23 13:13 +0000
      Re: The True Aficionado? mentificium@gmail.com - 2016-02-23 06:06 -0800
      Re: The True Aficionado? "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-24 04:40 +1100
        Re: The True Aficionado? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-23 09:50 -0800
        Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-24 13:40 +0000
          Re: The True Aficionado? "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 03:14 +1100
            Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-01 13:55 +0000
              Re: The True Aficionado? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-03-02 01:30 +1100
                Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-02 14:19 +0000
                Re: The True Aficionado? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 03:51 +1100
                Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-03 13:39 +0000
                Re: The True Aficionado? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-03 16:18 +0100
                Re: The True Aficionado? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 03:52 +1100
                Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-04 13:22 +0000
                Re: The True Aficionado? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-04 16:33 +0000
                Re: The True Aficionado? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-03-04 15:47 -0600
                Re: The True Aficionado? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-05 01:04 +0000
                Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-05 13:57 +0000
                Re: The True Aficionado? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-06 11:40 -0800
                Re: The True Aficionado? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-06 23:18 -0600
                Re: The True Aficionado? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-04 17:18 +0100
                Re: The True Aficionado? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-03-04 22:09 -0500
                Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-05 13:57 +0000
                Re: The True Aficionado? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-03-05 14:36 +0000
                Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-06 14:08 +0000
                Re: The True Aficionado? "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-07 02:03 +1100
                Re: The True Aficionado? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-06 17:28 +0100
                Re: The True Aficionado? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-06 11:54 -0800
                Re: The True Aficionado? "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-07 07:39 +1100
                Re: The True Aficionado? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-06 17:24 -0700
                Re: The True Aficionado? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-05 18:43 +0100
                Re: The True Aficionado? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-06 11:34 -0800
                Re: The True Aficionado? Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-03-07 16:24 -0600
                Re: The True Aficionado? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 03:45 +1100
                Re: The True Aficionado? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-03-03 16:01 -0600

csiph-web