Wrap your mind around this.

[Merlyn]

But the thing is... that is inaccurate, the definition by any standard is being twisted... because you are simply saying a human is a computer... an ant is a computer, any living thing on this earth is a computer, along with anything thing that a human can physically communicate with, whether being rock, stone, tree branch, or his own bowels. a Abacus CAN NOT PROCESS DATA... it can not move itself... it can not display an answer, it can display, after mans motion, a section of circular pieces that to the human is PROCESSED into data... if I look at an Abacus it would tell me nothing, I have no clue how to use one honestly, so to tell me it is processing data, that is completely inaccurate. It is setting the means for man to process what is being displayed in his own head... it can not store because it is able to hold in even balance (if balanced on a straight surface) a bunch of moving pieces, it is not storing it, it is doing nothing more then wishing it was still apart of the great tree in teh rain forest, before it was cut down... simply put, it has no thought, no control, and without the hand of man telling it what to do it can not function...

a computer is a device that is able to store information within itself to answer problems, solve problems on its own ect. Yes, it must be "tought" my man how to do it through coding, but if I go to a website to find ETA of a 1/4 mile run and type in my weight my hp and tempature outside, it can determine the information for me, where as a calculator designed for that SOUL task, could not... you would have to know the equation to find the answer... believe whatever you want in your computer classes, by your classification anyone can twist the definition to fit ANY object in this world. My monitor is a computer, as it is displaying informationf or me to see, must process that NO... THE COMPUTER IS PROCESSING IT JUST AS THE HUMAN is PROCESSING THE INFORMATION BEING PUT INTO THE ABACUS

and I cheated a little bit, but technically, this is as far as I could get it to go

<?php
include 'config.php';
$result = $mysqli->query("SELECT * FROM test");
$row = $result->fetch_array(MYSQLI_ASSOC);
$answer = ($row['1'] + $row['1']);
echo "Variable 1 + Variable 1 = " . $answer ."";
?>

Table Test =
row name 1 value 2

 

[pmohr]

l
Let's say I have a freshly built PC sitting in my room, no operating system, no other software of any kind installed on it. I turn it on and I give it inputs from the keyboard... according to you it will make a logical decision based on what I'm telling it to do through the keyboard. I say that it will do nothing because it has no instructions from a human on how to interpret what I'm doing to it. Basically the computer is dumb... it can't make decisions... it can only do what I tell it to do and so far I haven't told it to do anything yet.

Arguably, it will make logical decisions without an OS or software. Autoscan for HDDs in the BIOS, if it detects one, some BIOSs will set that drive as primary boot device if nothing else is found. Do a Ctrl+Alt+Del, the BIOS will interpret that and reboot. Set a password and enter the incorrect one, it will deny you access to the setup menus.

 

[Merlyn]

And unlike a abacus, you can program that computer to eventually perform tasks for you. An abacus has no memory to store, nothing to be taught, it is simply dumb all the time, until, to relate to your "new pc" go in everytime you "turn it on" and program yourself an OS to be stored in RAM and then deleted when you turn it back off...

I would say paper / pencil fit more of the criteria of a computer...

you can store information for technically ever, remove information if you please, solve way more on paper with the right formulas then you can on an abacus... I vote paper and pencil as a computer...

 

[SupraDerk]

But the thing is... that is inaccurate, the definition by any standard is being twisted... because you are simply saying a human is a computer... an ant is a computer, any living thing on this earth is a computer, along with anything thing that a human can physically communicate with, whether being rock, stone, tree branch, or his own bowels.

Wow, way to not put words in my mouth. When the hell did I ever say that an any living thing is a computer or that man was a computer? A computer is a TOOL used to compute data.

a Abacus CAN NOT PROCESS DATA... it can not move itself... it can not display an answer, it can display, after mans motion, a section of circular pieces that to the human is PROCESSED into data...

I beg to differ, an abacus will show you an answer, it's also a tool that you're using to compute something, holy shit?? Isn't that what I said a computer was?

And you made a point I've already made, a computer cannot make decisions on its own... it HAS to be told what to do. The abacus cannot make any kind of "decision" on it's own... it has to be manipulated by man.

if I look at an Abacus it would tell me nothing, I have no clue how to use one honestly

Well no shit, you don't know how to use one so how would you be able to interpret what its telling you?

, so to tell me it is processing data, that is completely inaccurate. It is setting the means for man to process what is being displayed in his own head...

Oh my god, you make my point again. The abacus isn't processing anything, that's why you have a brain, it is being used as a tool to aid you in computing. It is showing you the manipulations you are making to data you have stored on it.

it can not store because it is able to hold in even balance (if balanced on a straight surface) a bunch of moving pieces, it is not storing it, it is doing nothing more then wishing it was still apart of the great tree in teh rain forest, before it was cut down... simply put, it has no thought, no control, and without the hand of man telling it what to do it can not function...

Hmmm... seems to me if I move two pieces to one side and leave it it's storing the two pieces that I moved.

And you're right, it has no thought, no control and without man telling it what to do it can't do anything... kind of like a modern computer.

a computer is a device that is able to store information within itself to answer problems, solve problems on its own ect.

Don't agree with the solve problems on its own part... it wouldn't know what to do without intervention from man. A programmer has to tell a modern computer how to handle certain cases and what to do if such and such an event happens. The computer can't do it on its own.

Yes, it must be "tought" my man how to do it through coding, but if I go to a website to find ETA of a 1/4 mile run and type in my weight my hp and tempature outside, it can determine the information for me, where as a calculator designed for that SOUL task, could not... you would have to know the equation to find the answer

Don't know what you're getting at because the programmer of that website still has to enter the formula for you to be able to calculate the ETA.


And a calculator designed for the soul task of calculating ETA's couldn't calculate ETA's?

Using your example of a programmable calculator, I could write a program to tell the calculator the formula and to accept the same parameters as that website. The calculator would then be aiding me in my computations like any other computer.

... believe whatever you want in your computer classes, by your classification anyone can twist the definition to fit ANY object in this world. My monitor is a computer, as it is displaying informationf or me to see, must process that NO... THE COMPUTER IS PROCESSING IT JUST AS THE HUMAN is PROCESSING THE INFORMATION BEING PUT INTO THE ABACUS

Lost... me

and I cheated a little bit, but technically, this is as far as I could get it to go

<?php
include 'config.php';
$result = $mysqli->query("SELECT * FROM test");
$row = $result->fetch_array(MYSQLI_ASSOC);
$answer = ($row['1'] + $row['1']);
echo "Variable 1 + Variable 1 = " . $answer ."";
?>

Table Test =
row name 1 value 2

Didn't really show anything here.

 

[Dirgle]

Umm, I guess you lost as to the point you were trying to make. If you just look at a computer and don't interact with it it will just sit there and look back at you, just like an abacus. You have to input data to get it to do anything. Most of the data is input into the computer before you even buy it in the form of the OS and associated software. a format is designed for you to input data, and then retrieve data. An abacus has these same features. You must interact with it, the format for inputing and retrieving data is already established. And the fact that you can't go slinging it around and expect it to hold entered data is just an operating parameter, just like you can't take a computer in to the shower and expect it to hold the data you entered. It is an inherent operating parameter of both machines. Yes, the computer is far more complex, and can do a great deal more. They have roughly 2000 years on the abacus. And yes the human mind is considered the most complex computer in existence.

 

[SupraDerk]

Arguably, it will make logical decisions without an OS or software. Autoscan for HDDs in the BIOS, if it detects one, some BIOSs will set that drive as primary boot device if nothing else is found. Do a Ctrl+Alt+Del, the BIOS will interpret that and reboot. Set a password and enter the incorrect one, it will deny you access to the setup menus.

The BIOS was added by a person... direct instructions from a programmer telling the computer what to do. Take away the BIOS and any other hard coded program from any device in the machine and run that scenario again. Can the computer make a logical decision?

 

[Merlyn]

simply what I am getting at...

1. As stated a programmable calculator is not the same as a standard calculator, a programmable calculator is a computer...

See, the idea however is incorrect that you are stating... you are comparing an abacus and a computer, and state that both must be told what to do, that is accurate, but the part that is not the same is...

I install photoshop into my computer, I want to blur an image, correct I am telling that computer to blur the image, but lets step back, no I am not... I am using a GUI on the system and selecting a few options, from there, if the software was programmed properly, it would then perform the proper tasks through what was coded by Adobe's Programmers. I however am not instructing it in any way other then my thought process telling it to do that. You are looking at the whole argument from a programmers perspective, as with my website, I tell my server how to communicate with my database, I write code to properly arrange information in order ect ect... the difference is, the website can be used by anyone, and aside from using the features supplied on it, they are not telling it to do anything, they are not looking for any form of calculation, outside of the realm of simple math, very few programmers are actually telling the computer to do anything, they write code that has been designed to better ease the brain in constructing applications which is then sent through a compiler to check for any errors, long story short in the long run, it is then passed into assembly and further more binary, a bunch of true and false arguments. Yes, the computer has many more layers then the abacus, but the underlying argument I hold, yes the abacus more then likely led to the advancements of computers, as the horse a buggy lead to the advancement of automobiles, but a horse and buggy is not an automobile, as an automobile states in its name (easier device to show you my argument), it is auto, meaning on its own, mobile... yes you push the gas, so technically you are "telling" it to move, no you arn't, you are moving a wire that then opens the TB that then allows air to pass into the engine ect ect... a horse and buggy is technically automobile... but you are telling the horses to move, you are either through voice or physical abuse having those horses do the job... unless you are going to argue that a horse a buggy is an automobile, you can't say an abacus is a computer

under everything we do... every tool we use as humans especially computers, at some level they were written by man... but you have to realize at some extent, as coders... you are not manually doing the entire chain of events for the system to function unless you of course program in assembly. Simply put the argument can go on forever, but at some point there has to be a criteria that one of the 2 do not fit under... a computer is an abacus (can perform its tasks), but an abacus is not a computer... simply put

 

[pmohr]

The BIOS was added by a person... direct instructions from a programmer telling the computer what to do. Take away the BIOS and any other hard coded program from any device in the machine and run that scenario again. Can the computer make a logical decision?

True, I assumed you meant a motherboard straight OOTB, didn't know you meant no BIOS either. I'll concede to you there.

Now back to playing around with my old TI-92+ I found laying around.

 

[SupraDerk]

simply what I am getting at...

1. As stated a programmable calculator is not the same as a standard calculator, a programmable calculator is a computer...

See, the idea however is incorrect that you are stating... you are comparing an abacus and a computer, and state that both must be told what to do, that is accurate, but the part that is not the same is...

"You're killing me Smalls..."

I install photoshop into my computer, I want to blur an image, correct I am telling that computer to blur the image, but lets step back, no I am not...

Or yes you are. You are telling the program you want to blur an image... you are giving it a command, the computer manipulates the stored data and does the computations... aiding you as a tool.

I am using a GUI on the system and selecting a few options, from there, if the software was programmed properly, it would then perform the proper tasks through what was coded by Adobe's Programmers.

Some would call that instance executing a command that you told it to do.

I however am not instructing it in any way other then my thought process telling it to do that.

You have some kind of telepathic link to your computer? And even if so, you'd still be telling it what to do. I'm really not seeing what's so difficult about that concept to understand.

You are looking at the whole argument from a programmers perspective, as with my website, I tell my server how to communicate with my database, I write code to properly arrange information in order ect ect... the difference is, the website can be used by anyone, and aside from using the features supplied on it, they are not telling it to do anything, they are not looking for any form of calculation, outside of the realm of simple math,

I believe they are issuing a command that is still looking for a calculation, so the computer is aiding them in computing.

very few programmers are actually telling the computer to do anything, they write code that has been designed to better ease the brain in constructing applications which is then sent through a compiler to check for any errors, long story short in the long run, it is then passed into assembly and further more binary, a bunch of true and false arguments.

If you're getting down to the level of binary, then you're talking about manipulating hardware... in which case this whole section quoted is pointless because the programmer is telling the computer to do something. And that quoted section makes no sense anyways because why would someone go through the hassle of programming if they're not telling the computer to do something?

Yes, the computer has many more layers then the abacus, but the underlying argument I hold, yes the abacus more then likely led to the advancements of computers, as the horse a buggy lead to the advancement of automobiles, but a horse and buggy is not an automobile, as an automobile states in its name (easier device to show you my argument), it is auto, meaning on its own, mobile... yes you push the gas, so technically you are "telling" it to move, no you arn't, you are moving a wire that then opens the TB that then allows air to pass into the engine ect ect... a horse and buggy is technically automobile... but you are telling the horses to move, you are either through voice or physical abuse having those horses do the job... unless you are going to argue that a horse a buggy is an automobile, you can't say an abacus is a computer

I wouldn't try to call a horse and buggy an automobile, but I would call them BOTH vehicles. Which is about the same analogy as not calling an abacus a server, but both of them being computers.

 

[SupraDerk]

True, I assumed you meant a motherboard straight OOTB, didn't know you meant no BIOS either. I'll concede to you there.

Now back to playing around with my old TI-92+ I found laying around.

Haha, I used to play Doom on my friends old 92, man that thing got me through some classes

 

[pmohr]

Haha, I used to play Doom on my friends old 92, man that thing got me through some classes

I used to program the shit out of this thing during school, definitely made time go by faster.

Eventually I actually made program that would take C++ source as an input, and would validate a few simple, common errors that I usually made. TI-BASIC FTW.

 

[Merlyn]

This argument is useless we are arguing 2 different things, I however classified my wrong which is going to turn into "oh well if you had just said so" when in reality you didn't think of it either...

I am going to lay down the guard, because honestly, i know I was taught what I was taught but simply, I am arguing in regards to a digital computer... which was actually lead to start based on a calculator vs a computer, which I feel I still hold true to... but simply your automobile to vehicle statement made me research and thing... you are arguing in regards to

computer == vehicle

I am arguing in regards to

computer == automobile... a form of a vehicle, however with computers there are different relations of computers...

I am arguing on the grounds of a digital programmable computer, ex. Mark 1 (also known as any modern day device which would be classified as a computer and related back to the earliest, the Mark 1), you are arguing in the terms of a classification... when in theory the human is the first computer...

I like to debate, don't get me wrong, but to argue with someone on a principle of classification of the word used, is a rather hard thing to do... i.e you are a bitch, we no technically I am not a female dog, well technically another definition is this, but we won't argue the definition, we will argue the name, whether insult or not.

 

[SupraDerk]

I used to program the shit out of this thing during school, definitely made time go by faster.

Eventually I actually made program that would take C++ source as an input, and would validate a few simple, common errors that I usually made.

haha, that's awesome, I never thought about doing something like that

TI-BASIC FTW.

SERIOUSLY!! Some of my circuit analysis/design classes I wrote programs that would give me the correct answers so that I could double check everything... definitely a life saver. That was about as fancy as they got... other than the programs I wrote with cartoons making fun of my friends, heh

 

[Yellow 13]

ITT Nerd fights.

 

[Merlyn]

I programmed my TI-83 in Algebra 2, to do the work for me, because I suck at math, showed it to the teacher, she said if you are smart enough to program that then you can use it on tests, had every formula we ever learned... man was that rather difficult to do in script :-/

 

[Merlyn]

ok, we just spent 2 hours arguing, agreed we all 4 need to get a life?

 

[Dirgle]

This argument is useless we are arguing 2 different things, I however classified my wrong which is going to turn into "oh well if you had just said so" when in reality you didn't think of it either...

I am going to lay down the guard, because honestly, i know I was taught what I was taught but simply, I am arguing in regards to a digital computer... which was actually lead to start based on a calculator vs a computer, which I feel I still hold true to... but simply your automobile to vehicle statement made me research and thing... you are arguing in regards to

computer == vehicle

I am arguing in regards to

computer == automobile... a form of a vehicle, however with computers there are different relations of computers...

I am arguing on the grounds of a digital programmable computer, ex. Mark 1 (also known as any modern day device which would be classified as a computer and related back to the earliest, the Mark 1), you are arguing in the terms of a classification... when in theory the human is the first computer...

I like to debate, don't get me wrong, but to argue with someone on a principle of classification of the word used, is a rather hard thing to do... i.e you are a bitch, we no technically I am not a female dog, well technically another definition is this, but we won't argue the definition, we will argue the name, whether insult or not.

Yep, I saw this, and tried to figure a way around it but couldn't so I decided to just drop it. In terms of digital computers then yes you are correct. In terms of computers as a category, then we are right. we would have never been able to meet in the middle no matter how much we argued, at which point a debate to further understanding becomes nothing more than a waste of time.

 

[pmohr]

SERIOUSLY!! Some of my circuit analysis/design classes I wrote programs that would give me the correct answers so that I could double check everything... definitely a life saver. That was about as fancy as they got... other than the programs I wrote with cartoons making fun of my friends, heh

There was one major program running around our school, PimpWars or some stupid shit like that.

I used to use it in math class to brute-force questions on the test. Basically an iterative loop that would try answer after answer...wasn't allowed to use my 92+ because it was QWERTY keyboard, so instead I wrote up the progs on my 83+SE and used them there. Also wrote a program that would behave like the regular interface, when you hit the PRGM key it would show as an empty list, because the teachers liked to check for programs before tests.

Good times...

 

[SupraDerk]

ok, we just spent 2 hours arguing, agreed we all 4 need to get a life?

Basically, haha


But I see where the disconnect was and Dirgle is right, there's no freaking way any of us would've met in the middle, hah.

 

[Merlyn]

Not to start a mass argument again, but I wanted to get my sisters boyfriends opinion (Virgina Tech Graduate in Computer Engineering)

(11:00:14 PM) Merlyn: would you consider an abacus a computer
(11:00:24 PM) Mike: no, its a calculator though
(11:00:55 PM) Mike: there are no logic gates
(11:01:12 PM) Merlyn: explain?
(11:01:24 PM) Merlyn: you have a degree in what again?
(11:01:27 PM) Mike: a computer is a complex set of logic gates
(11:01:31 PM) Mike: computer engineering
(11:02:03 PM) Mike: so at a minimum, a computer requires logic gates
(11:02:13 PM) Mike: AND and OR
(11:03:14 PM) Mike: an abacus doesn't store information any more than paper does
(11:03:23 PM) Mike: in fact, less. if you shook it, its gone
(11:03:25 PM) Merlyn: yes, but they argued paper was a computer as well
(11:03:34 PM) Mike: then you're dealing with fools, abandon hope
(11:03:36 PM) Merlyn: in the sens of a computer
(11:03:42 PM) Merlyn: they are computer engineers
(11:03:54 PM) Merlyn: atleast 1 is
(11:04:01 PM) Mike: obviously not from an acredited university of any stature
(11:03:23 PM) Mike: in fact, less. if you shook it, its gone
(11:05:39 PM) Mike: in the barest sense, an abacus is an adder and computers depend on adding
(11:06:15 PM) Mike: but...a computer is automated and use adding to do much more than basic arithmetic