Joseph, I told you how to compute “reachable” so it doesn’t matter if you relabel the concept “fizzbin”. First, all actions are labeled fizzbin. Next, the reliable consequence of any fizzbin state of the world is labeled fizzbin (and we keep track of any actions that were labeled fizzbin along the way). If the goal state is ever labeled fizzbin, the actions labeled fizzbin on that pathway are output.
That’s how we do it in Artificial Intelligence, at least in the first undergraduate course.
And the analogous internal perception of an algorithm that computes fizzbin-ness, is what humans call “could”. This is my thesis. It is how you get able-ness from computations that take place on transistors that do not themselves have able-ness or possibilities, but only follow near-deterministic lines.
Joseph, I told you how to compute “reachable” so it doesn’t matter if you relabel the concept “fizzbin”. First, all actions are labeled fizzbin. Next, the reliable consequence of any fizzbin state of the world is labeled fizzbin (and we keep track of any actions that were labeled fizzbin along the way). If the goal state is ever labeled fizzbin, the actions labeled fizzbin on that pathway are output.
That’s how we do it in Artificial Intelligence, at least in the first undergraduate course.
And the analogous internal perception of an algorithm that computes fizzbin-ness, is what humans call “could”. This is my thesis. It is how you get able-ness from computations that take place on transistors that do not themselves have able-ness or possibilities, but only follow near-deterministic lines.