In von Neumann’s defense, he may have said this before the strong negative results in computability theory. Machines cannot do lots of stuff.
There is the overwhelmingly clear implication in von Neumann’s claim that the ‘something’ in question is ‘something that a human can do that a machine cannot do’. If we are going to abandon that assumption we can skip computability theory and go straight to “Travel faster than light. Ha!”
What there is difficult for you to understand? I can’t make it much simpler than that and it seems to be more or less well formed vernacular.
If you are trying in a backhanded way to make the point “Humans are machines! The set you mention is empty!” then yes, that is rather close to von Neumann’s point.
If you are trying in a backhanded way to make the point “Humans are machines! The set you mention is empty!” then yes, that is rather close to von Neumann’s point.
Indeed, I can’t think of any plausible meanings for machine, do and tell which would make that quotation non-tautological but true.
Sorry. What I meant is that computer programs can’t speak English, or any other natural language. When you get a program that can speak English it will most likely be trivial to make a program that does the translation CronoDAS was talking about.
In von Neumann’s defense, he may have said this before the strong negative results in computability theory. Machines cannot do lots of stuff.
There is the overwhelmingly clear implication in von Neumann’s claim that the ‘something’ in question is ‘something that a human can do that a machine cannot do’. If we are going to abandon that assumption we can skip computability theory and go straight to “Travel faster than light. Ha!”
Speak English
EDIT: That is an example of what you are looking for.
What there is difficult for you to understand? I can’t make it much simpler than that and it seems to be more or less well formed vernacular.
If you are trying in a backhanded way to make the point “Humans are machines! The set you mention is empty!” then yes, that is rather close to von Neumann’s point.
Indeed, I can’t think of any plausible meanings for machine, do and tell which would make that quotation non-tautological but true.
And if everyone else was able to see that I guess von Neumann would never have needed to make the statement.!
Sorry. What I meant is that computer programs can’t speak English, or any other natural language. When you get a program that can speak English it will most likely be trivial to make a program that does the translation CronoDAS was talking about.
Ahh, I see. I may have been less confused if you replied to the quote directly.
Natural language processing is certainly one task that has not yet been eliminated as a counter-example.