[TimSchumann]

> Without CPUs, we can be freed from the tyranny of the halting problem.

Can someone please explain to me what this even means in this context?

Serious question.

[orra]

He also claims that the cardinality of the reals is the same as the integers.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36074287

You could say he had a history of using big words to talk shit.

[WithinReason]

A neural network is perfectly deterministic, the runtime is predictable before you run it. Which I don't think is going to be true much longer.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41623474

[benzible]

It's gibberish. For one thing... https://arxiv.org/abs/1901.03429

[mikewarot]

Think of it as unwinding a program all the way until it's just a list of instructions. You can know exactly how long that program will take, and it will always take that same time.

[krisoft]

But will it always solve the task? Because without that it it is trivially easy to “solve” the halting problem by just declaring that the turing machine halts after X steps.

[TimSchumann]

Wouldn’t this also imply a lack of Turing completeness, and thus not be good for general purpose computing?