Originally posted by DeepThoughtI saw another estimate go 1 to 10 exaplops. So I doubt a 1 exaflop machine will equal a human. And besides, humans come in such a wide range of intelligence themselves, so maybe a 1 exaflop comp could simulate a dude with an IQ of 50, how many exa's would it take to equal Einstein or Newton?
I don't agree that a conventional computer could ever be equivalent to a human brain. By conventional computer I mean a Turing machine. While they might be computationally more powerful, we have things like intuition, we are able to leap to the correct conclusion and then work out why we are right. Quantum machines may be able to do that, but that is not what they are talking about.
Originally posted by sonhouseA Trash-80 could simulate a Bill O'Reilly and have the capability of adding small integers.
I saw another estimate go 1 to 10 exaplops. So I doubt a 1 exaflop machine will equal a human. And besides, humans come in such a wide range of intelligence themselves, so maybe a 1 exaflop comp could simulate a dude with an IQ of 50, how many exa's would it take to equal Einstein or Newton?
If they show, say a 10 exaflop machine making scientific breakt ...[text shortened]... xceeding human ability, even the best of us. Till then, Whoopee, we simulated Bill O'Reilly.....
Originally posted by sonhouse"So I doubt a 1 exaflop machine will equal a human."
I saw another estimate go 1 to 10 exaplops. So I doubt a 1 exaflop machine will equal a human. And besides, humans come in such a wide range of intelligence themselves, so maybe a 1 exaflop comp could simulate a dude with an IQ of 50, how many exa's would it take to equal Einstein or Newton?
If they show, say a 10 exaflop machine making scientific breakt ...[text shortened]... xceeding human ability, even the best of us. Till then, Whoopee, we simulated Bill O'Reilly.....
Originally posted by FabianFnasThen again Kasparov swore up and down a computer would never beat him....
"So I doubt a 1 exaflop machine will equal a human."
So do I.
It only takes a handheld calculator from 80ies to calculate a square root with six decimals that no (but a few) humans can do.
Originally posted by DeepThoughtWhich is not nearly as magical as you seem to think.
I don't agree that a conventional computer could ever be equivalent to a human brain. By conventional computer I mean a Turing machine. While they might be computationally more powerful, we have things like intuition, we are able to leap to the correct conclusion and then work out why we are right.
Originally posted by twhiteheadOh yes it is. Human's can take on NP hard problems and get it right. No matter what the processing power of a Turing machine it simply cannot compete with a human on some sorts of problems.
Which is not nearly as magical as you seem to think.
[b]Quantum machines may be able to do that, but that is not what they are talking about.
Ordinary Turing machines can do that. What they lack is computing power and programming. But we will get there.
The biggest problem right now, is that computing has focused on what is essentially a single ...[text shortened]... in graphics cards. Instead the focus has been on single threaded computing as fast as possible.[/b]
Originally posted by DeepThoughtAnd that would be because a quantum machine IS a different animal. You might call it a massively parallel machine because of the superposition of numbers and logic effects, it can be an or gate, and gate, nor gate, Xor gate, a not gate, and so forth all at the same time. Sounds like massive parallel to me. Not only massive parallel but simultaneous massive parallel. You can't get that in a conventional computer even if it was the size of the solar system using up all the energy of the sun for regular logic gates one molecule in size it wouldn't be able to do that. It would be dam good at simulations though
Oh yes it is. Human's can take on NP hard problems and get it right. No matter what the processing power of a Turing machine it simply cannot compete with a human on some sorts of problems.
Bear in mind that we have significant philosophical differences. You seem to regard the world as deterministic. I do not. So from your point of view a ...[text shortened]... ied to determinism, a quantum Turing machine is qualitatively different from a conventional one.
Originally posted by DeepThoughtA Turing machine can't compete yet merely because they are neither fast enough nor programmed to do so. But there is nothing whatsoever mathematically stopping them from doing so.
Oh yes it is. Human's can take on NP hard problems and get it right. No matter what the processing power of a Turing machine it simply cannot compete with a human on some sorts of problems.
Originally posted by FabianFnasWhen a computer writes a best seller novel or wins the Noble prize for some fantastic new theory, THEN maybe we can say computers are more intelligent than humans.
"So I doubt a 1 exaflop machine will equal a human."
So do I.
It only takes a handheld calculator from 80ies to calculate a square root with six decimals that no (but a few) humans can do.
Originally posted by sonhouseWhen a human can decrypt a megabyte size document using a 160-bit secret key, THEN maybe we can say humans are superior to computers...
When a computer writes a best seller novel or wins the Noble prize for some fantastic new theory, THEN maybe we can say computers are more intelligent than humans.
Originally posted by FabianFnasDifferent skill sets. It's like saying when a human can beat a Corvette in the quarter mile, we can say humans are superior to cars.
When a human can decrypt a megabyte size document using a 160-bit secret key, THEN maybe we can say humans are superior to computers...
Originally posted by sonhouseExactly. I bet you haven't written any best seller novels nor won any Nobel prizes. Why demand that of a computer?
Different skill sets. It's like saying when a human can beat a Corvette in the quarter mile, we can say humans are superior to cars.
Originally posted by FabianFnasHumans have built computers. How many computers have built a human?
When a human can decrypt a megabyte size document using a 160-bit secret key, THEN maybe we can say humans are superior to computers...