[FRIAM] Few of you ...

[uǝlƃ ☣]

Heh, all of this begs for a definition of "algorithmic".  I sincerely doubt Nick was using it in the sense of a fully definite process that is guaranteed to halt.  So, there's something else, there, something significantly *softer* ... more vague ... ill-defined.  It's almost as if Nick (or Wouk via Nick) thinks rigorous social rules violate the soul or denigrate the individual mind in favor of the biofilm (that we actually are).

It brings Taoism to my ignorant mind.  It seems the fully enlightened individual is perfectly free if and only if they fully engage in their algorithmic behavior.

On 1/15/19 9:13 AM, Prof David West wrote:
> Computers, computing, software: all are algorithmic, creating an
> "algorithmic context" (Navy) within which human users (Sailors) are
> constrained to act.
> Like human sailors in the Navy, human users acting in this algorithmic
> context can only go wrong if they attempt to utilize their "native
> intelligence."
> Moreover, this state of affairs is pretty much intentional (albeit
> sometimes below the threshold of awareness). In the algorithmic world,
> humans are nothing except sources of error. Even those developing the
> software are assumed to be (the vast majority anyway) incompetent and
> must be constrained by rigid and detailed methodology.
> SkyNet has won and we are but its minions.


-- 
☣ uǝlƃ