Thought this related: But the lesson Rovelli wants us to learn is that nothing has any properties at all until it interacts with something else. And between those interactions there are no properties at all. What quantum mechanics is teaching us, Rovelli says, is that reality is a vast net of interactions where there are no things, only relationships.
Thank you for the API Framework! I have been stuck in an error state for some time now, and your code was what I was looking for; some of these ideas have the power to save machines from early failstate crashes! Much love from Canada! ❤
I wish you gave an example or two of when the judge part of the self image cannot just be implemented as part of the sequencing, considering the sequencing is (as you mentioned) turing-complete. On another note, these machines have the capability of self-modification (as any reliable system should to be able to adapt to changing requirements), but which of the four parts is doing that modification? The way I understood it all four parts only act on data and not other parts of the system so there's nothing in the system that is even capable of doing it, let alone has the job of doing it.
The basic claim is judgment is partly but inherently implementation-specific, depending on details unavailable to any distant programmer. The real power (and risk) is that the four parts can be programmed to control each other. Thanks for engaging!
Upon further thought, the "judge" seems to be a different term for verifier, and the sequencer is the usual trick of turning a problem verifier into a problem solver by iterating over the space of possible solutions. Ignoring P vs NP (it is often quicker to verify a solution than to solve the problem), this is an often used structure in software development (stream processing is an example).
I did not watch previous videos and English is not my first language. I couldn't tell with certainty what was metaphorical and what was actually meant. That let me feel drunk being sober at the same time. Highly concentrating on what is going on. So now I'm not sure if I got the point, at least the ending was kind of clear for me to understand and felt like some kind of reincarnation. And great presentation by the way.
Very cool Dave. The idea of the duality of programmer and programed held together by the code itself is a profound one. Reminds me of when two people are "engaged in the Torah". Thanks for taking the time to create this.
