soreff comments on Getting Over Dust Theory - Less Wrong

6 Post author: jhuffman 15 December 2009 10:40PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (97)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: soreff 17 December 2009 02:31:35PM *  0 points [-]

Your response is irrelevant to the central topic of this discussion. The entire point of the whole discussion is whether it makes sense to include dust in the class of places we consider as possible computing systems or not.

Comment author: DanArmak 18 December 2009 10:13:00AM 0 points [-]

What I'm saying is this. You're faced with various ways in which dust-based systems differ from ordinary ones (e.g., you can't interact with them). Then you have two options: either say dust-based systems don't perform computation; or say computation doesn't require interaction. The difference between the two is solely in the definition of "computation".

Discussing the appropriate definition of "computation" is a worthwhile discussion to have. But you have to be aware that you won't get any more information out of this deliberation than you put into it.