🚀 go-pugleaf

yamauchi@cs.rochester.edu (Brian Yamauchi)
University of Rochester Computer Science Department

> Suppose virtual reality technology develops to the point where it is
> impossible for a human to tell an illusion from reality (this is
> already the case for still computer graphic images of some objects)...
> Now, suppose that we can develop a program which can react to these
> images in the same way that a human can... Now, if you are arguing that
> it will be impossible in *practice* to build a simulator which has the
> complexity of the real-world, in terms of interactivity and modeling of
> complex physical laws, then you may have a point.

First of all, the last point WAS my point: The problem of designing a
robot that will pass the Total Turing Test (TTT) is a tiny subset of
the problem of simulating the world the robot is in, not vice versa.
(Another way to put it is that an analog object or state of affairs is
infinitely more compact than any possible symbolic description of it. To
approximate it closely enough, the description quickly becomes
ludicrously large.)

Second, the point of the TTT is for the ROBOT to pass it, in the world
and for us, not for its WORLD to pass it for us.

Finally, it's irrelevant what graphics we hook onto one symbol cruncher
in providing inputs to another symbol cruncher. (That's like having two
computers play chess against one another: it may as well all be one
computer.) Symbol crunchers don't see, not even if you hook transducers
onto them. It's just playing on the illusion from OUR point of view to
bother having a graphics interface. So it's still just the hermeneutic
circle, whether we're projecting our interpretations on symbolic text
or on symbol-governed graphics.
-- 
Stevan Harnad  Department of Psychology  Princeton University
harnad@confidence.princeton.edu       srh@flash.bellcore.com
harnad@elbereth.rutgers.edu    harnad@pucc.bitnet    (609)-921-7771