Automoderated users, Autopatrolled users, Comment administrators, Confirmed users, Moderators, Rollbackers
29,188
edits
Numb3rs: Difference between revisions
m
link
(update links) |
m (link) |
||
Line 52:
** Moreover, working on unsolvable problems is his legitimate day-job: he's not doing it ''just'' to sulk. Plenty of folks use work as a distraction when they're upset.
* [[Did Not Do the Research]]: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2rGTXHvPCQ Explaining IRC.]
** True for just about every computer science description in the entire show. The Turing Test is incorrectly explained in two different episodes, one of which involves Amita "delivering" the test to a computer. <ref>The [[wikipedia:Turing test|Turing test]] proves that a computer is realistically emulating human conversation by having a neutral observer communicate with a human and a computer, not knowing which is which, and determining if the observer is able to distinguish between the two. Amita, by sitting in front of the computer and asking it questions, would therefore be unable to determine if the computer passed, since she already knows whether or not she is talking with a computer. Further, there's not a predefined list of questions for it. Oh, and a computer capable of passing the Turing test would be a spectacular feat, even if {{spoiler|that's all it was able to do. In the episode, it's pretty much shrugged off once it's revealed the computer was designed specifically to pass the test, and has no "intelligence" of its own.}}</ref> The show also makes typical use of [[Magic Computers]], and anything computer-ish at all needs Charlie or Amita to explain it (incorrectly), even though the FBI really should employ IT and CS staff of its own (egregiously, Amita acts like [[L33t L1ng0|leetspeek]] is a dead language that needs to be deciphered. While it can be hard to read, the title of the show is in leet).
*** And what was with all that [[Artificial Intelligence|"silicon-based lifeform"]] stuff? Since when is intelligence even a component of life, let alone ''its only'' feature?
*** When it shows none of the prerequisites for life (i.e. respiration (anaerobic or aerobic), growth, reproduction), most philosophers fall back on the argument of intellect. The only prevailing quality that can count as life in an inorganic structure is intelligence or the ability to create an original thought process (or the programming equivalent), so this is probably not that far stretched (depending on your definition of life). Also the Turing Test thing wasn't so bad. They ''very'' awkwardly handwaved the idea saying it was a "modified version" and barely skimped on the boundary parameters but it sorta holds up (you just have to rewrite the book on bias though...)
| |||