6 comments

• 

  Michael Lee

  1 year ago

  You are completely wrong in part of your argument. To quote you:
  
  "This is completely wrong. Source code is perfectly understandable to computers. Indeed, there are programs called interpreters that allow computers to directly execute programs stored in source code form."
  
  The fact that the computer needs an additional interpreter to understand the source code means that the computer does not understand the source code at all. By your logic I can be accused understanding Japanese if there happens to be a person standing next to me who can interpret for me. I cannot understand a word of Japanese and unless I have the internal ability to do so you cannot rightfully accuse me of that capability.
• 

  JWB

  1 year ago

  The case of a computer with an interpreter is more analogous to having a Japanese interpreter in your head. The software is part of a computer's internal abilities as much as a person's acquired language skills.
  
  What I don't understand is what makes source code different from an "mathematical algorithm" but then how then is a series of instructions for building a machine different from a "mathematical algorithm"?
• 

  Tim Lee

  1 year ago

  Michael,
  
  Distinguishing between a computer's "intrinsic" capabilities and those capabilities that requires "additional help" seems like a fool's errand to me. You can, in fact, build computers that directly execute human-readable programming languages. On the other hand, some CPU's, such as Transmeta's Crusoe, essentially execute machine language "in software." And there are languages like Java that compile to a bytecode that machine languages nevertheless have to interpret.
  
  Waxman's point was that it required human intervention before a computer could execute source code. When Waxman says that "A lot of work has to be done in items of debugging and testing," he's talking about more than just knowing to download the relevant interpreter and/or run the code through gcc. This clearly is not so.
  
  JWB, the difference is that a mathematical algorithm deals entirely with abstract mathematical constructs like numbers and variables, whereas the instructions for building a machine necessarily involve real-world parameters that can only be approximated by mathematical description. "2 + 2 = 4" is a mathematical algorithm. "Put two eggs and two cups of flour into a bowl" is a recipe. "Egg" and "flour" are not abstract concepts that can be given precise mathematical definitions, and so therefore the latter is not a mathematical algorithm.
• 

  Phil B

  1 year ago

  No patents means a free for all
• 

  Wookey

  1 year ago

  PhilB - what, you mean like free competition on an open market, with direct copying protected from by copyright?
  
  Shocking.
• 

  Vera

  1 year ago

  http://ipowerdirect.net/bloghoster/?w=Summer