Why do you believe that the problem of naming doesn’t fall into computer science? Because people in that field find the question to low status to work on?
Nothing to do with status (did I actually say something that suggested a status link?), and my claim isn’t that computer science doesn’t have a problem with naming things (everything has a problem with naming things) but that when Karlton said “computer science” he probably meant “software development”.
[EDITED to remove a remark that was maybe unproductively cynical.]
The question isn’t whether computer science has a problem with naming things but whether naming information structures is a computer science problem.
It’s not a problem of algorithms but it’s a problem of how to relate with information. Given how central names are to human reasoning and human intelligence, caring about names seems to be relevant for building artificial intelligence.
Why do you believe that the problem of naming doesn’t fall into computer science? Because people in that field find the question to low status to work on?
Nothing to do with status (did I actually say something that suggested a status link?), and my claim isn’t that computer science doesn’t have a problem with naming things (everything has a problem with naming things) but that when Karlton said “computer science” he probably meant “software development”.
[EDITED to remove a remark that was maybe unproductively cynical.]
The question isn’t whether computer science has a problem with naming things but whether naming information structures is a computer science problem.
It’s not a problem of algorithms but it’s a problem of how to relate with information. Given how central names are to human reasoning and human intelligence, caring about names seems to be relevant for building artificial intelligence.