Xref: utzoo comp.ai:2779 talk.philosophy.misc:1669
Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!rutgers!mailrus!cornell!uw-beaver!microsoft!chrispi
From: chrispi@microsoft.UUCP (Chris Pirih)
Newsgroups: comp.ai,talk.philosophy.misc
Subject: Re: Artificial Intelligence and Intelligence
Keywords: random? oh no!
Message-ID: <1069@microsoft.UUCP>
Date: 2 Dec 88 22:52:07 GMT
References: <484@soleil.UUCP> <0XTukNy00Xol41W1Ui@andrew.cmu.edu> <42328@linus.UUCP>
Reply-To: chrispi@microsoft.UUCP (Chris Pirih)
Organization: Microsoft Corp., Redmond WA
Lines: 22

In article <42328@linus.UUCP> bwk@mbunix (Kort) writes:
>Andrew C. Plotkin writes:
>>I maintain that a human can be simulated by a Turing machine.  Comments?
> ... I use a quantum amplifier in my coin flipper.
>Correct me if I'm wrong.  But a Turing Machine is obliged to follow
>a deterministic program.  Hence a Turing machine cannot simulate my
>dice-tossing method.

Nothing prevents the Turing machine from flipping a coin and acting
[deterministically] on the [random[?]] result.  (What exactly are we
trying to simulate here, Barry?  Is the coin, with its quantum
randomness, a part of the human who consults it?)  Besides, is it
necessary that a simulated coin-flip be "truly" random, or just
effectively unpredictable (i.e., that the Turing android eschew
foreknowledge of its pseudo-random pseudo-coin-flip)?  The latter
seems sufficient to me.

---
chris

(Besides, I never toss dice to make a decision; your Turing machine
should have no problem simulating me...)