Araraukar wrote:Excidium Planetis wrote:"Such yes/no data can be expressed in numerical form, as you just did in your example by assigning yes and no the values of one and zero, and therefore is a digital device."
Can be. Does not mean it
is. "
"And what
is one and zero? Please show me any device that literally stores a one, rather than information which is assigned the value of one. As I said before, one is an abstract concept that does not exist in the real world. It is a value assigned to things that exist in the real world. In electronic computers, usually the value one is assigned to circuits that are on and zero is assigned to those that are off. On and off are not literally one or zero, but they can be expressed that way. Yes and no are not literally one or zero, but they can be expressed that way."
How would you
digitally express "maybe yes" and "maybe not"?
"With digits."
"Quantum computers are digital. Quantum computers have only three possible values for each qubit: 1, 0, or a superposition of the two states. There is no continuously variable information, so numerical values can be assigned."
Actually, that's tridigital, not just
digital.
"They are digital.
Any device which uses discrete values that can be expressed numerically is digital, regardless of how many discrete values there are."
(OOC: This is literally the definition of digital devices. I don't know why you are arguing this, but take a look at
Merriam Webster, particularly definition 3, but also 4, 5, and 6. The Cambridge Academic Content Dictionary
says digital is "recording or showing information in the form of numbers, esp. 0 and 1".
Oxford Dictionaries specifies binary in the primary definition, but 1.1 say devices which use digital signals, which are most often IRL, but not always, binary. It is also important to note that Oxford's definition demonstrates why your 'what if the data uses flavors' argument is complete nonsense: the numbers are "typically represented by values of a physical quantity such as voltage or magnetic polarization." Obviously voltage and magnetic polarization are not literally one or zero, they are only expressed that way. The digits could be represented by flavors, but if they can be expressed numerically, they are still digital.)
(OOC: And arguing about what quantum computers can and can't do is pretty much a moot point - what you're describing is what RL computer science is trying to do, not what an actual quantum computer might be able to do. We don't know, because we don't yet have one IRL. Heck, it might use flavours instead.)
OOC:
And now you betray your ignorance of the subject. We do know, because
we do have quantum computers in real life.
Wikipedia wrote:2001, researchers demonstrated Shor's algorithm to factor 15 using a 7-qubit NMR computer.[42]
And that's just the start. The developments go on. There is even a
commercially available quantum computer. Please, do some research before making ridiculous arguments.
"but as long as the data can be expressed in numerical form, then it is a digital device."
That's just cheating. Anything can be expressed in
numerical form if you have specifically designed a system to do it.
"It isn't cheating, it is the definition of digital. Not everything can be expressed numerically. Any value that is continuously variable cannot be expressed numerically."
In fact, by your definition you and I, and all living beings are digital devices, since our
parts, our
data can be expressed in numerical form.
"Last time I checked, you and I and all living beings were not 'artificial equipment'. This line of argument is complete nonsense."
Also
GAR #354 might conflict with your definition. You might want to make your definition read "
non-sapient artificial equipment".
"First of all, GA#354 doesn't conflict at all. GA#354 defines artificial intelligence, not digital devices. In fact, neither digital nor devices are even mentioned in GA#354, so I don't see how any conflict could result.
"Second, I absolutely will
not allow digital devices to be unlawfully hacked just because they are sapient. Sapient digital devices have just as much a right not to be hacked as non-sapient ones. Obviously, times of war against sapient digital combatants is an exception."
OOC: Not all the links are actually relevant, I'm just in a wacky mood due to lack of sleep and numbers seem silly.
OOC:
Well, that might explain the poor argumentation.