The title being a mere reference to Turing machines. Since I wanted to bring up the subject of short-sightedness of those that do not understand the fundamental nature of the Church-Turing thesis and Halting Problem deeply enough.
Because they, symptomatically, consider that humans can solve the problems associated with it hence any machine that would think similarly enough or better than humans, would have overcome the problems by sheer thinkpower. But that is simply wrong. Humans do not overcome the problem, they work around its applications — another element of what makes us human, maybe. And there is no guarantee whatsoever, or rather to the contrary, that any ASI will be able to do the same, in all situations — because any true ASI will explode to cover all of the universe hence also all of its problem areas, right ..? [Reference to Kurzweil’s books and ideas not really necessary, are they?]
Gödel’s Incompleteness isn’t just something that can be solved! It is!, whether that’s fortunate or not. And a world ‘beyond’ such axiomatic issues, well… Wovon man nicht sprechen kann…
And Good versus Evil: Also not ‘solved’ by humans. And phenomenology — not something that the ultimate abstract of Hegelian Ratio can ‘solve’. And …
In similar vein (not?):
[The eternal fight between Good and Evil, ratio versus original Natural brute force, Yin versus (!)(?) Yang; Sevilla]
Maverisk 