[gurps] Failing autopilots and RVO

[Johannes Trimmel]

On Wed, 4 Mar 2009, Onno Meyer wrote:

> Travis replied to me:
> > I see no reason that the proof is only for machines, it also applies
> > to methods or procedures that involve one or more people.
>
> If those people follow an algorithm. Humans can decide not to
> do that. If computers deviate from their program, that must be
> programmed to start with.
>

I think someone else said it already in other words, the decisions of a
given human in a given situation are an algorithm. An extremly complicated
one but still an algorithm.

Which means that the question weather humans can solve problems that
turing machine equivalent computers can't can be reformulated as "are
human minds (human decision algorithms) equivalent to turing machines.

My bet is that the answer is that humans are turing machine equivalent,
but AFAIK there is no solid enough proof or heuristics, that stating the
opposite for a fictional background needs too much suspense of disbelief.

Then you are still left with the question, which tasks require non turing
machines to solve. Which is a complex and in most interesting cases not
easily answerable by an amateur (or even a professional).

My own preferred solution is to keep things abstract whereever possible. I
figure in what positions i want to have humans based on what sort of feel
i like for a campain. (like i decide if i want a pilot and a navigator or
if i just want one of them). Then i state that for instance piloting can
be improved by having a human pilot, human pilots get some unspecified
output from the shipcomputer and give equally unspecified responses.

Piloting/TL is the skill to operate this computer interface. What aspects
of the actualy flying of the vehicle are governed by that are not
important and ignored.


One mans groundfloor is an other mans earthmissle
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Johannes Trimmel
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@