Re: Low-level vs. High-level programming (was My First Computer)

[Maciej Witkowiak <ytm@elysium.pl.andremowe.me>]

Randy McLaughlin wrote:
>> That brings up an interesting thought.  The Turing machine was designed to
>> break German ciphers.  Should anything that is Turing complete be able to
>> break ciphers?

Turing machine is a mathematical model. It wasn't designed to complete a
specific task. It even can't be built in the real world (like most of
mathematical models - it is ideal).
Real machines used for cracking Enigma code were 'cryptological bombs', first
built in Poland and used before WW2 and then Ultra in Bletchley Park where
Turing and many more joined.

> Better yet instead of "Should anything that is Turing complete be able to
> break ciphers?", require that every computer only be allowed to break
> cyphers.  That way we would not have this thread and everyone would agree.

It amazes me how easy people talk on topics they have no idea about (oh wait,
wildstar in my killfile...). Talking about 'Turing machine' and 'being
Turing-complete' is not a discussion about which soundtrack in 8-bit game is
the best. These terms are well-defined and there is no place for argue.
If you don't like these definitions - fine, but you are no longer refering to
these terms then. You talk about something else. If you don't understand the
definition - don't talk at all.

Read something. Both of you.

Turing machine:
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_machine

Turing-complete:
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing-complete

Enigma:
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enigma

ytm

-- 
Najlepsza sygnatura to brak sygnatury.