The field

All functions a computer does involve strings of zeros and ones. That is it. Standard logic has either a true or false value. There is no, 'not enough information to make a judgment'.

So, in sigpfe's blog, he is talking about at what point on .011111... or .00000... a computer should know when to stop and make the calculation. Funny.

He says, "it is impossible to implement addition correctly." The first example stops at six decimal places and the computer would spit out: .06. But how does a computer know to stop at six decimal places? Or in the second example, when does the computer know to just stop spitting out zero’s and just fucking say zero? At what point between 1 and 1 does 1+1 get to 2? What exact moment does the log catch on fire? The rational decision any computer ultimately makes is predetermined.

This is the difference between theoretical and actual infinity. Merely by calling infinity ‘infinity’, it contradicts itself by negating its intrinsic meaning.Th

That is what Girard touches on with his quote ,"To find an appropriate framework to formulate theorems on computation is one of Geometry of Interaction’s ultimate goals," in a comment to the posting. How do we teach a computer the frame, or in other words human intuition?

I do not think this is ever something a computer will ever be able to genuinely know. We are inherently different than the machines we make. They are merely reflections, derivatives, of us.
Worse, I think we try to embody the idea of computers. The problem is that the computer never knows when to stop.

It will take that stream of 1’s out to infinity forever, the same way the greedy person wants more and more and more money. Structurally, the human machine minimizes cost to maximize profit. But this is a problem because we can sacrifice our lives, joys, sorrows, and moments to maximize our consumption of arbitrary, dichotomous things. It is why people spiral down the path of drugs or any type of addiction. Addiction to knowledge, money, sex, calculators, typography, cheap labor, ourselves, on and on. Just certain addictions are more sustainable than others. The heroin user will go down, physically and mentally, a lot faster than the working pez addict.

The same is true, but oft-neglected, about the way we are operating towards the environment now. We are addicted, for many reasons, but mainly, financially to oil. We need to look at it in a higher order frame. We are running out of it for future sustainable use and, concurrently, destroying our ecosystems.

To all you neo-free market pundits out there: Keynes puts it well, “in the long run we all die.” The laissez faire person assumes humanly time and resources are infinite. The only thing is, they are not. Our earth is not renewable.